Docteur Qui

I feel the same way about virtually all of the Wizarding World as portrayed in the films post PoA. Instead of absurdist, magical, interesting architecture we just get... retro real-world buildings. The Ministry of Magic is deliberately modelled after the London and Moscow undergrounds and it shows - on one hand I see how suggesting a time and place can be effective visual storytelling, but it also contradicts the social structure of the magical society as it's portrayed in the books. The buildings are supposed to be weird - most witches and wizards look down on Muggles (whether that's affectionately or sinisterly) so it doesn't make much sense that their aesthetic is virtually the same. It's the same with the clothing/robes - they're supposed to be flamboyant but in the films they're either nonexistent or just lightly tailored suits/variations on Muggle fashion.
 
Don't get me started on the portrayal of actual magic/spells. As @Holko pointed out everything's strangely mechanical and logical when it should be bizarre and absurd. We never see any interesting spells or charms, especially from GoF onwards - it's all just generic jets of light, shields and explosions. Yates is squarely responsible IMO, for going with the "realistic, grounded and gritty" aesthetic that dominates the franchise. I hope the show goes to someone with vision and flair, someone weird - imagine Terry Gilliam (who Rowling originally wanted to direct) producing this show, it would be amazing!

I feel the same way about virtually all of the Wizarding World as portrayed in the films post PoA. Instead of absurdist, magical, interesting architecture we just get... retro real-world buildings. The Ministry of Magic is deliberately modelled after the London and Moscow undergrounds and it shows - on one hand I see how suggesting a time and place can be effective visual storytelling, but it also contradicts the social structure of the magical society as it's portrayed in the books. The buildings are supposed to be weird - most witches and wizards look down on Muggles (whether that's affectionately or sinisterly) so it doesn't make much sense that their aesthetic is virtually the same. It's the same with the clothing/robes - they're supposed to be flamboyant but in the films they're either nonexistent or just lightly tailored suits/variations on Muggle fashion.
 
Don't get me started on the portrayal of actual magic/spells. As @Holko pointed out everything's strangely mechanical and logical when it should be bizarre and absurd. We never see any interesting spells or charms, especially from GoF onwards - it's all just generic jets of light, shields and explosions. Yates is squarely responsible IMO, for going with the "realistic, grounded and gritty" aesthetic that dominates the franchise. I hope the show goes to someone with vision and flair, someone weird - imagine Terry Gilliam (who Rowling originally wanted to direct) producing this show, it would be amazing!

I feel the same way about virtually all of the Wizarding World as portrayed in the films post PoA. Instead of absurdist, magical, interesting architecture we just get... retro real-world buildings. The Ministry of Magic is deliberately modelled after the London and Moscow undergrounds and it shows - on one hand I see how suggesting a time and place can be effective visual storytelling, but it also contradicts the social structure of the magical society as it's portrayed in the books. The buildings are supposed to be weird - most witches and wizards look down on Muggles (whether that's affectionately or sinisterly) so it doesn't make much sense that their aesthetic is virtually the same. It's the same with the clothing/robes - they're supposed to be flamboyant but in the films they're either nonexistent or just lightly tailored suits/variations on Muggle fashion.
 
Don't get me started on the portrayal of actual magic/spells. As @Holko pointed out everything's strangely mechanical and logical when it should be bizarre and absurd. We never see any interesting spells or charms, especially from GoF onwards - it's all just generic jets of light, shields and explosions. Yates is squarely responsible IMO, for going with the "realistic, grounded and gritty" aesthetic that dominates the franchise. I hope the show goes to someone with vision and flair, someone weird - imagine Terry Gilliam (who Rowling originally wanted to direct) producing this show, it would be amazing!

I feel the same way about virtually all of the Wizarding World as portrayed in the films post PoA. Instead of absurdist, magical, interesting architecture we just get... retro real-world buildings. The Ministry of Magic is deliberately modelled after the London and Moscow undergrounds and it shows - on one hand I see how suggesting a time and place can be effective visual storytelling, but it also contradicts the social structure of the magical society as it's portrayed in the books. The buildings are supposed to be weird - most witches and wizards look down on Muggles (whether that's affectionately or sinisterly) so it doesn't make much sense that their aesthetic is virtually the same. It's the same with the clothing/robes - they're supposed to be flamboyant but in the films they're either nonexistent or just lightly tailored suits/variations on Muggle fashion.
 
Don't get me started on the portrayal of actual magic/spells. As @Holko pointed out everything's strangely mechanical and logical when it should be bizarre and absurd. We never see any interesting spells or charms, especially from GoF onwards - it's all just generic jets of light, shields and explosions. Yates is squarely responsible IMO, for going with the "realistic, grounded and gritty" aesthetic that dominates the franchise. I hope the show goes to someone with vision and flair, someone weird - imagine Terry Gilliam (who Rowling originally wanted to direct) producing this show, it would be amazing!

I always thought the interior was a bit dull in comparison too, and too mechanical/logical in the one place they tried to be magical, the invented moving stairs. Same with Hogwarts Legacy.
Cuarón got it the most right with the portrait gallery and by making it busy and full of life! And with the rickety wooden bridge. In the book there are tapestries, secret passages behind them, suits of armor Peeves can hide in, tons of staircases, some of which lead somewhere different on a random day of the week, a step on a staircase you have to remember to skip or your foot will get stuck in it... they never had enough fun with it! Just go full British fairytale absurdist! Make it, you know, magical?

They should stick to the description of Hogwarts in the book I reckon - aesthetically the film castle is beautiful but I always imagined the real Hogwarts as a little more ramshackle. Not quite the Weasley's house, but still not as graceful as the film; kind of like a fortress with towers coming out of it in not-quite-right ways. It should look as if it was made with magic and not from human engineering. The book version of the castle is much smaller as well, as there's only around 850 students; realistically the film version would feel perpetually empty with that number of students spread over its enormous grounds.
 
The biggest challenge is giving the castle an iconic silhouette, which is something the film version did perfectly.

They should stick to the description of Hogwarts in the book I reckon - aesthetically the film castle is beautiful but I always imagined the real Hogwarts as a little more ramshackle. Not quite the Weasley's house, but still not as graceful as the film; kind of like a fortress with towers coming out of it in not-quite-right ways. It should look as if it was made with magic and not from human engineering. The book version of the castle is much smaller as well, as there's only around 850 students; realistically the film version would feel perpetually empty with that number of students spread over its enormous grounds.
 
The biggest challenge is giving the castle an iconic silhouette, which is something the film version did perfectly.

They should stick to the description of Hogwarts in the book I reckon - aesthetically the film castle is beautiful but I always imagined the real Hogwarts as a little more ramshackle. Not quite the Weasley's house, but still not as graceful as the film; kind of like a fortress with towers coming out of it in not-quite-right ways. It should look as if it was made with magic and not from human engineering. The book version of the castle is much smaller as well, as there's only around 850 students; realistically the film version would feel perpetually empty with that number of students spread over its enormous grounds.
 
The biggest challenge is giving the castle an iconic silhouette, which is something the film version did perfectly.

I doubt that. I imagine Abrams is planning a rebrand after the fiasco that was TROS. That seemed like the end point of his Spielberg/Lucas homage era.

I'm down for it, but I want them to return to the island. Preferably just one person trying to survive on Sorna or Nublar. Feel free to set it prior to to the JW movies, if necessary. And please, pretty please, no Giacchino.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/new-jurassic-world-movie-in-the-works-1235792506/

If there's one thing Machine Games is good at it's making killing Nazis a lot of fun. From the glimpses of combat they seem to have captured the very stylised violence of Spielberg's films; those punches have real heft to them.
 
Remains to be seen how the game will go though. It's obvious they wanted to steer clear of Uncharted territory, specifically the climbing mechanics of that series. It makes sense, seeing as those games were direct homages to Indy and pretty much wrote the book on how you'd make a modern Indy game, but I'm not entirely convinced a FPS approach will work for Indy. For one, FPS games are not known for their intricate puzzle design, and I'd be extremely disappointed if that aspect of the game is lacking. But who knows, perhaps that's why there's 4(!) studios attached to the game - one of them are bound to make a good puzzle or two.
 
Here's an extended look at the game, and it's chock-full of what I assume is the new score. It's Gordy Haab doing what he does best; classic 80's Williams. I look forward to hearing it in full:
 
 
 

If there's one thing Machine Games is good at it's making killing Nazis a lot of fun. From the glimpses of combat they seem to have captured the very stylised violence of Spielberg's films; those punches have real heft to them.
 
Remains to be seen how the game will go though. It's obvious they wanted to steer clear of Uncharted territory, specifically the climbing mechanics of that series. It makes sense, seeing as those games were direct homages to Indy and pretty much wrote the book on how you'd make a modern Indy game, but I'm not entirely convinced a FPS approach will work for Indy. For one, FPS games are not known for their intricate puzzle design, and I'd be extremely disappointed if that aspect of the game is lacking. But who knows, perhaps that's why there's 4(!) studios attached to the game - one of them are bound to make a good puzzle or two.
 
Here's an extended look at the game, and it's chock-full of what I assume is the new score. It's Gordy Haab doing what he does best; classic 80's Williams. I look forward to hearing it in full:
 
 
 

Without writing a 5000 word essay about my issues with those games, I'll say that they both suffer from what I call endorphin-first game design. Their size and polish distract from what is a fairly basic activity/reward system, facilitated in the case of Mario with level design that bored me to tears, and in the case of Zelda, systems that overlap, designed solely for the increase of work, and to give the illusion of choice and progress. It's trickery.
 
And don't get me started on the ever-more-slippery, frictionless nightmare that is the movement in Mario Odyssey.
 
 

Using all of the available information we have so far, I've gone ahead and drawn a preliminary sketch of what the artifact might look like.
 
This may contain story spoilers, so click at your own risk!
 
 

It's been a long time since I've listened to the OST, and for all the years I've had the 2012 LLL, I can't remember listening to it more than once or twice, so I can't really make any informed comparisons right now... suffice to say, over the last few days I've listened to this set several times already, and it is simply marvelous. In the past I've found the score a bit overwhelming in its wealth of themes and setpieces, but somehow this new presentation makes it a varied and satisfying listen throughout. Not to mention the songs on the last disc giving so much more context to the theme usage in the film! (The only critical observation I could make would be that for my ears, the music and lyrics of the songs sometimes don't mesh very well on a micro-level - the stresses/accents of the text differ from those of the melody...)
 

Oh wow, the “Duel” performance is really something special. I adore the idea of turning it into an actual duel between violin and cello. The way the performers interact with one another and with Williams… it really highlights the reimagining of these pieces as something to watch being performed as opposed to merely listening. It distills the purpose of what he’s achieved with these late collaborations with Mutter. It’s a true privilege to be able to experience Williams’ music in this context; elevated.
 
It’s as though all those decades of “serious” critics and institutions deriding JW’s music (and film music in general) as a lesser form of art have completely washed away. That they can all see him now, and the ways in which his music has transcended the films they were written for… Not that those views have ever really mattered much to those of us who’ve always loved his music, but there’s a certain satisfaction in knowing that he is now universally considered to be an artist of the highest calibre and integrity by those same institutions. It’s sublime.

Oh wow, the “Duel” performance is really something special. I adore the idea of turning it into an actual duel between violin and cello. The way the performers interact with one another and with Williams… it really highlights the reimagining of these pieces as something to watch being performed as opposed to merely listening. It distills the purpose of what he’s achieved with these late collaborations with Mutter. It’s a true privilege to be able to experience Williams’ music in this context; elevated.
 
It’s as though all those decades of “serious” critics and institutions deriding JW’s music (and film music in general) as a lesser form of art have completely washed away. That they can all see him now, and the ways in which his music has transcended the films they were written for… Not that those views have ever really mattered much to those of us who’ve always loved his music, but there’s a certain satisfaction in knowing that he is now universally considered to be an artist of the highest calibre and integrity by those same institutions. It’s sublime.

I listened to this episode tonight at work.  There can't be more than several thousand people in the entire world who would be interested in hearing that episode.  And of those several thousand, I cannot imagine that a single one of them wouldn't find this episode to be absofuckinglutely fascinating.  Terrific listen, and my hat is now permanently off to Mike Matessino.  (Not that it wasn't already; it was.)

Does anyone else notice the proto-HP1 sound to much of that Hook score?
 
Unrelated thought, listening to this release a 3rd time through, the music I enjoy most is all the Face of Pan & You are the Pan stuff. Such beautiful melodies.

Is Peter Pan high, boy? He ain’t no flyboy!

🥲 something lovely happened.
 
i was listening to ‘when you are alone instrumental’ sitting on the floor looking at the window alongside my 15 month old daughter.
 Halfway through, i couldnt help it and started singing the lyrics. Then she looks at me, smiles and embraces me resting her little head with mine.
 
🫶🏼

I personally use an app on my phone called AfterShip, which allows me to track all kinds of international parcels by pasting the tracking number. It’s not always completely accurate (sometimes parcels aren’t updated and then all of a sudden they arrive!), but usually better than nothing.

Has anyone from Australia received theirs yet? I ordered within hours of it being available from the LLL website; it’s been shipped and the USPS tracking site says it arrived at an origin transfer airport on December 9th but hasn’t moved since, still “in transit”.
 
I’m getting a little antsy as last year when I ordered TND it never arrived at all, I checked the status in early Jan and it said “delivered” but never got it. I was eventually sent a replacement but that took another month.

Fellow Australian here! I ordered minutes after it became available. It took a week to ship, has currently been in transit for 10 days, and estimated time of delivery is December 22-27.