Harry Potter PoA impressions
Jun. 7th, 2004 01:17 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tenayaI very much enjoyed the film and state that I would agree with 90% of what other people have eloquently expressed. There were a lot of very nice details, some whimsical, some quite unexpected and funny (like the bluebirds, Buckbeak taking a dump....) I like the very real visual presence of autumn and winter and the character of the Whomping Willow. I was squicked by the floating Dementors and the glimpses of their bodies covered in raw sores. I thought the soul sucking effect might have been better realized somehow as the blurry images seemed simplistic. I loved Buckbeak. The werewolf was interestingly done, but somehow the surface/skin of it seemed too smooth, like the details hadn't been added yet. I suppose he could have been covered in skin then fur, but then there was still a lack of detail. From what I remember from one viewing, so maybe I'm wrong.
I thought most of the casting was excellent and thought Robert Hardy was perfect as the Minister of Magic. I, too, was a little put off by a dowdy Dumbledore and miss the piercing intelligence that Richard Harris brought to the role. Dumbledore resting his hand on Ron's bandaged leg really didn't work for me; that's a level of slapstick that has never worked for me. I think Dumbledore is aware of details that most people can't see, so it was not believeble that he would be unaware he was causing hurt to an injured child. I thought Gary Oldman was pretty repulsive as an escaped prisoner, but I had the impression that Sirius had a commanding or charismatic presence that I don't sense from Oldman. He seemed a comforting presense to Harry as he invited him to stay with him, while in the book, I got the impression that excitement was somehow on the table, too. I liked how comfortable Lupin seemed and I enjoyed that Lupin's scenes with Harry weren't rushed. I think I pictured Lupin sadder somehow. Hermione was stronger in the movie as she seemed short tempered and frazzled in the book. I like the domestic scenes in Gryffindor, the sense that Harry was comfortable and accepted by his classmates.
As for the editing, I liked how they merged scenes from the book, cut out stuff that could be cut without effecting the spirit of the book. It was an excellent adaption. I liked the visual stuff that only can be done in a movie, like all the gears in the clock tower, the astromonical models in Lupin's rooms, the segue of the owl flying from autunm to winter.
I think I would have preferred the film to be longer for two reasons: one, is that, save for the main three characters, everyone else's on screen time seemed much too short. I wanted more of everyone and definitely more Snape! My main complaint of the film was how abrupt the scenes started. To give an example, one scene opens with the Dursley's door opening and Harry asking for his Hogsmead permission slip to be signed. I would have liked to see Harry reading the slip upstairs and knowing how much it meant to him before he presented it to his uncle. Or later on, I would have liked to see Harry get his invisible cloak as he decides to break the rules and sneak into Hogsmead. I suppose it was a way to keep the movie short, but it made me feel like I was watching a series of clips instead of a film. It seems like a small complaint, but it effected my enjoyment of the entire film. Perhaps it won't be so noticeble in a repeat viewing? Hopefully so.
Anyway, I really did like the film. It was highly entertaining and a great adaption of the book.
I thought most of the casting was excellent and thought Robert Hardy was perfect as the Minister of Magic. I, too, was a little put off by a dowdy Dumbledore and miss the piercing intelligence that Richard Harris brought to the role. Dumbledore resting his hand on Ron's bandaged leg really didn't work for me; that's a level of slapstick that has never worked for me. I think Dumbledore is aware of details that most people can't see, so it was not believeble that he would be unaware he was causing hurt to an injured child. I thought Gary Oldman was pretty repulsive as an escaped prisoner, but I had the impression that Sirius had a commanding or charismatic presence that I don't sense from Oldman. He seemed a comforting presense to Harry as he invited him to stay with him, while in the book, I got the impression that excitement was somehow on the table, too. I liked how comfortable Lupin seemed and I enjoyed that Lupin's scenes with Harry weren't rushed. I think I pictured Lupin sadder somehow. Hermione was stronger in the movie as she seemed short tempered and frazzled in the book. I like the domestic scenes in Gryffindor, the sense that Harry was comfortable and accepted by his classmates.
As for the editing, I liked how they merged scenes from the book, cut out stuff that could be cut without effecting the spirit of the book. It was an excellent adaption. I liked the visual stuff that only can be done in a movie, like all the gears in the clock tower, the astromonical models in Lupin's rooms, the segue of the owl flying from autunm to winter.
I think I would have preferred the film to be longer for two reasons: one, is that, save for the main three characters, everyone else's on screen time seemed much too short. I wanted more of everyone and definitely more Snape! My main complaint of the film was how abrupt the scenes started. To give an example, one scene opens with the Dursley's door opening and Harry asking for his Hogsmead permission slip to be signed. I would have liked to see Harry reading the slip upstairs and knowing how much it meant to him before he presented it to his uncle. Or later on, I would have liked to see Harry get his invisible cloak as he decides to break the rules and sneak into Hogsmead. I suppose it was a way to keep the movie short, but it made me feel like I was watching a series of clips instead of a film. It seems like a small complaint, but it effected my enjoyment of the entire film. Perhaps it won't be so noticeble in a repeat viewing? Hopefully so.
Anyway, I really did like the film. It was highly entertaining and a great adaption of the book.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2004-06-11 01:05 pm (UTC)I have to admit, I'd forgotten how Hermione was keeping up with her classes, so that part of the plot came as almost a fresh surprise to me. Memory, ah, the first thing to go...
(no subject)
Date: 2004-06-13 11:23 pm (UTC)Actually, I suppose the paper Harry was reading in the opening scene was the Hogsmeade permission slip, but I was too focused on Harry's wand that kept going out, and wondering why he couldn't maintain such a simple spell.
hellooooooooooooo!
Date: 2004-07-14 12:33 am (UTC)***HUGS*** and more ****HUGS****
I liked the HP movie too - but it was lamentably short of Snape (apart from the lovely scene where he protects the kids from the werewolf, despite his own fear, sigh). I have to admit to being mildly addicted to Harry/Snape (and also Magnificent 7 still, so Eric Close is a near second to Alan Rickman at the moment in my personal top ten). There is so mush good fiction out there! Are you writing? I haven't...sadly. BUt some great writers are - Nym, Predatrix, Seeker, Sushi, Mairead Triste and the totally fabulous Tara Tory!!! And good recs for me, hmm???