Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them 5-film series

[Not Mr. Big 4,639]

Harry only hooks up with Ginny because she reminds him of Ron

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Does she end up looking like Isla Fisher or Jessica Chastain or Sally Spectra or whoever?

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Hermione and Draco should have ended up together.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

That would have been like Kylo/Rey.

[Fancyarcher 350]

I actually really enjoyed the first Fantastic Beasts, and thought it added to the Potter mythology appropriately. This looks better though. Hogwarts, cool. Also hopefully JNH delivers the goods again, I really enjoyed his score to the first. 

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Jude Law already seems like a better Dumbledore than the tired old guy and the crazy old guy.

[Matt C 452]

1 hour ago, Philippe Roaché said:

Hermione and Draco should have ended up together.

 

You've been reading too much fan fiction.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

I haven't read any. I just think it's sexy.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Hermione/Ginny...

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Ginny in the movies = 

 

I don't know about the books.

[mrbellamy 6,270]

3 hours ago, Fancyarcher said:

I actually really enjoyed the first Fantastic Beasts, and thought it added to the Potter mythology appropriately. This looks better though. Hogwarts, cool. Also hopefully JNH delivers the goods again, I really enjoyed his score to the first. 

1

 

JNH is definitely the one keeping it alive for me, I hope he does them all. It'll be cool to see how he does the Paris stuff in this one.

 

3 hours ago, Not Mr. Big said:

Harry only hooks up with Ginny because she reminds him of Ron

 

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

18 minutes ago, Philippe Roaché said:

Ginny in the movies = 

 

I don't know about the books.

 

She's not much better. I couldn't understand the fan hype for her. If she had more to do in PoA, GoF and OotP, I might have cared.

[Matt C 452]

2 hours ago, Philippe Roaché said:

I haven't read any. I just think it's sexy.

 

I honestly thought JKR should've paired Harry with Hermione.

 

I kinda get where you're coming from with Draco/Hermione.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Could have made it an S&M novel.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

My filthy little mudblood.

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

I think Fantastic Beasts was one of the better realized more sophisticated blockbusters of recent times.

 

While there is action, it's not like it's a chock-a-block with mayhem. The majority of scenes are character scenes. The lead characters are all well developed and well played.

 

The storytelling is really strong with several different storylines crisscrossing and intersecting and eventually coming together in the end.

 

The movie also has sweep and scale and the production is beautiful with Oscar nominated sets and costumes. And that killer score from JNH.

 

honestly the story-telling alone makes it one of the better blockbusters. It is definitely more literate and high-minded than your typical superhero movie.

[bollemanneke 3,334]

I would have wanted Harry and Hermione too. It would be so romantic, a Muggle couple that got to know each other in the wizarding world. Didn't JKR say herself she would have preferred H and H recently?

[Holko 9,491]

She says stupid stuff all the time to try and stay relevant.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

22 minutes ago, Philippe Roaché said:

My filthy little mudblood.

 

Man that's a kinky fanfic waiting to happen.

 

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Dumbledore is gay? Trump is worse than Voldemort?

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I couldn't believe that last one. And of course the compliant media and her loyal subjects devoured it.

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

She's a great story-teller, an okay writer and an absolutely insufferable activist/"celebrity voice". 

 

 

[Chen G. 3,940]

Just now, TheUlyssesian said:

She's a great story-teller, an okay writer

 

You've got those the other way around...

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

4 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

 

You've got those the other way around...

 

Her plotting is extra-ordinarily good, her actual writing leaves a lot to be desired.

[Bilbo 3,709]

1 minute ago, TheUlyssesian said:

 

Her plotting is extra-ordinarily good, her actual writing leaves a lot to be desired.

 

Agreed. Her prose is average but by God does she know how to tell a story with compelling characters.

[Chen G. 3,940]

There's more to storytelling than just "compelling characters". There's the sense of escalation which, granted, she has got better at over time, but still I find her writing to be languid, at times; there's the need for every narrative element to have narrative utility, which entails planting-and-payoff mechanisms, which she often eschews in her writing, etc...

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

I actually think she might be more suited to screen-writing than novels because screenwriting can hide her weakness with prose.

 

The last 3 HP books are so disastrously written writing wise - they have decent plots but I can't in good faith call them good books because the writing is so abysmal. 

 

She basically hit the jackpot too soon in her career. She's now bigger than big so nobody's gonna say no to her and even her first draft is going to get printed and make millions. So she will never learn. Writers who hit success late have the time and opportunity to refine themselves.

[Chen G. 3,940]

I would say the opposite is true. Generally, in film, narrative issues tend to present themselves more clearly than in a book, so when a book has some small narrative defects, you can look past them, whereas in adapting that book to the big screen those issues stick out like a sore thumb.

 

But because of Rowling's position as a producer, and now screenwriter, and because she in fact did not have her books mapped out, the screenwriters in charge of adapting her works were too often too timid to attempt and improve upon her source material in the process of the adaptation, as they should have.

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

I think the problem always exist when you are adapting a story where you don't know the end.

 

Same is true for GoT. Once the series is over and the over-arching story has been revealed and made clear, presumably a dense, concise, compact, tight and engaging movie series could be made. Because you would be able to excise all extraneous characters and subplots and focus on the meat of the story thus yielding a richer experience. 

 

I feel the opposite to you about writing for films and books. In the books - it is only and only your writing. In film, a lot of bells and whistles can mask poor writing - specially great editing and great direction. So novels reveal more weaknesses in a writer than film. 

[Holko 9,491]

2 hours ago, Chen G. said:

the screenwriters in charge of adapting her works were too often too timid to attempt and improve upon her source material in the process of the adaptation, as they should have.

 

That was only an issue in the first two films, the later ones (especially 5 and onwards*) deviated too far from her plots and left out a lot of early plantings in favour of stupid shit, and so written themselves into the corner when having to pay them off in the finale, so a lot of stuff comes completely out of nowhere. The last film also completely fucks the most important core theme of the books (every person is only human, and has to die, and will lie on and in the ground with the rest of the bodies) for the moderately impressive and completely illogical CG spectacle of Voldemort's "death", and removes one of the best aspects of Harry's development** for a drawn-out, stupid and unnecessary chase scene.

 

*6 onwards don't even have the cheap shot of not knowing where the story would go - Book 7 came out at the very end of movie 5's postproduction.

 

**The trio dynamic is always: Harry is the nerve (acts on impulses, brave/reckless, heroic), Hermione is the brain (obvious) and Ron is the heart (unusual, because it's usually the girl, but he's the glue that holds them together, brigthens them up and motivates them - he's also the first one to make a self-sacrifice) - but by the finale, Harry has all 3 - Nerve is obvious, Heart because he goes out to the forest to sacrifice himself for all of his friends, to cast the protective spell on them and give them the chance to kill Voldy, and Brains, which shows in how he figures out the Elder Wand's behaviour, and slowly talks Voldy down in front of the whole school and the Death Eater army, which is a badass finale.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Yeah Ron and Hermione are useless at the end.

[Holko 9,491]

The book's not called Harry Potter, Ron Weasley, Hermione Granger and the Deathly Hallows, is it?

[Chen G. 3,940]

25 minutes ago, Holko said:

That was only an issue in the first two films, the later ones (especially 5 and onwards*) deviated too far from her plots and left out a lot of early plantings in favour of stupid shit, and so written themselves into the corner when having to pay them off in the finale, so a lot of stuff comes completely out of nowhere. e.

 

Far be it from me to defend the last film - I do think its quite a let-down. But I do find that I like the later films (from 3 going forward) more than the first two, which I know stuck very close to the book.

 

I stopped reading Harry Potter after a while, and I even only watched the later film adaptations very recently, so my point of view on the subject is an entirely cinematic one. If I watch a film and like it, whether it is like the source material or not is a none-issue. Adaptations exist to serve the film, not the source material.

 

Even in the last film, I find most of the issues to stem from what at least seems like sticking to the source material, rather than from changes: I don't take issue with the splitting of the book into two features, for instance. But I do take issue when something is planted but isn't payed off:  We learn that Bellatrix killed Neville's parents, only for her to be killed by Mrs. Wisley? A more audacious (read: a better) screenwriter will have changed that, but JK Rowling wouldn't have any of that.

[Holko 9,491]

Yeah, but 6-8 must make no sense if you haven't read the books. Just an example: In book 6, H&D watch a memory where young Tom Riddle plays nice to Hepzibah Smith, who owns the Goblet of Hufflepuff. D theorises that Voldy loves collecting trophies and loves Hogwarts, one of the horcruxes is likely this goblet. In the movie they don't have this memory because... they needed the time for the burning of the Burrow only for it to have not a dent in the next one, I dunno. Now, in book 7, Harry knows what he's looking for in the Gringotts Vault, but in 8 the movie, he just kind of gets in there because maybe something's there. Then suddenly Voldy happens to think of the goblet and Harry happens to see it. What is that goblet? Why is it important? Does Voldemort have any reason he made it important? Does he have any character at all beyond a weird speaking manner? Who cares, we gotta get to the part where they chase Nagini for an hour while Harry and Voldemort fly around the castle wrestling in black smoke!

 

In other words, if you deviate from the source, do it well and in a way which makes sense and is followable.

[Chen G. 3,940]

I don't recall too much of the films' finer plot points, but I certainly don't recall them not making sense. I suppose there may have been some continuity issues, but nothing that drew my attention too much.

 

21 minutes ago, Holko said:

In other words, if you deviate from the source, do it well and in a way which makes sense and is followable.

 

There's no "if" here. Few and far between are the books that read like a screenplay. Most of the time, books are written with an ebb-and-flow that is fundementaly different to that of a film, and in that case making changes (beyond just abridging the book) is not an "if" - its a given.

[Jay 37,249]

1 hour ago, TheUlyssesian said:

She basically hit the jackpot too soon in her career. She's now bigger than big so nobody's gonna say no to her and even her first draft is going to get printed and make millions. So she will never learn. Writers who hit success late have the time and opportunity to refine themselves.

 

Yes

[The Illustrious Jerry 3,356]

Read the first book but didn't like the storytelling style. I'll stick to Tolkien, Verne, and Conan Doyle novels at this point, thank you very much.

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

1 hour ago, Holko said:

Yeah, but 6-8 must make no sense if you haven't read the books. Just an example: In book 6, H&D watch a memory where young Tom Riddle plays nice to Hepzibah Smith, who owns the Goblet of Hufflepuff. D theorises that Voldy loves collecting trophies and loves Hogwarts, one of the horcruxes is likely this goblet. In the movie they don't have this memory because... they needed the time for the burning of the Burrow only for it to have not a dent in the next one, I dunno. Now, in book 7, Harry knows what he's looking for in the Gringotts Vault, but in 8 the movie, he just kind of gets in there because maybe something's there. Then suddenly Voldy happens to think of the goblet and Harry happens to see it. What is that goblet? Why is it important? Does Voldemort have any reason he made it important? Does he have any character at all beyond a weird speaking manner? Who cares, we gotta get to the part where they chase Nagini for an hour while Harry and Voldemort fly around the castle wrestling in black smoke!

 

In other words, if you deviate from the source, do it well and in a way which makes sense and is followable.

 

This is 100% true. I have some friends who tried watching the latter films but found them absolutely confounding and gave up. I think the film's can still be enjoyed for the spectacle and the basic archetypal lead characters - you know clearly who the good guys and the bad guys are - so can roughly follow even if you do not understand the entire plot. 

 

Plots in films are rarely as complicated as they can get in books.

[Alex 2,833]

Let's just blame David Yates

[Matt C 452]

11 hours ago, Margo Channing said:

 

Man that's a kinky fanfic waiting to happen.

 

 

There are numerous Draco/Hermione ones out there. 

 

There's a disturbing amount of Snape/Hermione fic too.

[Arpy 4,145]

18 hours ago, Chen G. said:

I would say the opposite is true. Generally, in film, narrative issues tend to present themselves more clearly than in a book, so when a book has some small narrative defects, you can look past them, whereas in adapting that book to the big screen those issues stick out like a sore thumb.

 

But because of Rowling's position as a producer, and now screenwriter, and because she in fact did not have her books mapped out, the screenwriters in charge of adapting her works were too often too timid to attempt and improve upon her source material in the process of the adaptation, as they should have.

What? Each of the directors maintained a working relationship, were briefed and had constant consultation from Rowling, the direction the series took and the quality of the films we got is entirely down to that collaboration, and in many cases it was Rowling who had the opportunity to improve her own work. 

 

 

 

[Chen G. 3,940]

1 minute ago, Arpy said:

it was Rowling who had the opportunity to improve her own work. 

 

And didn’t.

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

14 hours ago, Matt C said:

 

There are numerous Draco/Hermione ones out there. 

 

There's a disturbing amount of Snape/Hermione fic too.

 

The kinkiest might be the Ginny/James potter fanfic. Might add an oedipus angle to the story.

[bollemanneke 3,334]

Holko, that bit about the Horcruxes in film 8 doesn't really hold up because in the films, they just make Harry capable of hearing Horcruxes. The only problem that's left then is, why didn't he hear the diary in the second movie? I do agree that it's very unfortunate that we never got more than two flashbacks into Voldy's past, though.

 

And speaking of problems, I've been re-reading POA and just discovered two huge plot problems:

1. Why did Fred and George never spot Pettigrew on the map?

2. When they are preparing to have Sirius Kissed, why can't someone just give Sirius Veritaserum to check whether all the prattling about Pettigrew being alive is true or not? That's what every constitutional state would do, right?

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

1. Maybe they weren't looking or didn't care.

 

2. These books sometimes read like a prose version of The Simpsons and the Wizarding World is some bizarre satire land like Springfield, so the wizarding authorities have a Mayor Quimby/Chief Wiggum/Skinner "GET HIM!" mentality.

[Kasey Kockroach 2,343]

Dobby x Snape.

 

"Master has taken virginity. Dobby is free!"

[bollemanneke 3,334]

1. Can't believe that.

2. Haha.

[Kasey Kockroach 2,343]

I'd like to say I'm joking, but really, I'm sure it's out there. 

[Alex 2,833]

I believe within the HP universe Veritaserum is strictly controlled and not 100% accurate (like a lie detector).

[bollemanneke 3,334]

It's definitely 100% accurate. You could argue one could use magic to undo its effects, but that has neverbeen mentioned.