Potterdom Film/Score Series Thread

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

The whole concept is a hard sell for me, and take Williams out of the picture along with the lighthearted fantasy tone, and I'm done.

[Jay 37,374]

I think WB should have kept bringing in new directors to keep things fresh. Yates was totally fine for Film 5, and maybe bring him back for 7 but have someone else do 6 and 8. I imagine he'll suck the fun out of Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them and Tarzan....

[Wojo 2,453]

That's kinda true. When Voldemort could be hiding under any rock, who has time to crack jokes and play games and celebrate Christmas and snog your best mate's sister? That shit's gotta go, bring on the gray pallette.

[Jay 37,374]

It was appropriate for the films to get more serious and dark after Voldemort returns at the end of Film/Book 4. But they didn't have to have ALL the humor completely removed.

Actually now that I'm remembering, Film 6 was actually full of humor. Almost overboard.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

5 was Yates' worst film Jason. HBP was great!

[Jay 37,374]

5 was fine but they shouldn't have cut all the fun stuff they get up to in the Ministry of Magic

6 was a pretty empty film. The death of Dumbledore should have had a much bigger impact

[Once 605]

The novels are so rich. Such a wonderful collection of characters that could have been used to much greater extend.

Damn, to have access to those characters... I would love to adapt any of the stories, haha.

5 was fine but they shouldn't have cut all the fun stuff they get up to in the Ministry of Magic

6 was a pretty empty film. The death of Dumbledore should have had a much bigger impact

Well, apparently they filmed quite a bit of the Ministry stuff.

[Wojo 2,453]

Skipping the funeral was weak.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

You must be joking!

6 was a symphony of anguish and darkness. 7 too, with 8 being a sappy happy ending.

[mrbellamy 6,293]

Still pisses me off 11 years later they didn't explain the origins of the Marauder's map and who Moony, Padfoot, Wormtail, and Prongs are in HP3.

I don't think they really had to go into the Marauders story, but yeah, they could have made it a little more clear that they wrote the map with even just an extra line or two.

Most of my problems with the films as adaptations are in the Deathly Hallows movies, actually. The other films would typically set up an idea or subplot and then leave you hanging, but the last films did the opposite, shoving in all these things from the book without even setting them up, and that was even worse to me. That mirror shard was really lazily handled, I know they didn't introduce it in Order of the Phoenix, but Harry could have easily found it when he went back to Sirius's house instead of having it right at the beginning of the film where it makes no sense. The Lupin thing, there's actually a scene in the screenplay where Lupin announces Tonks' pregnancy and names Harry godfather so I don't understand why they cut that but then still talked about the kid in the Resurrection Stone scene where it comes out of nowhere. I also think it was pretty silly of them to leave in the scene with Dumbledore's brother if they weren't going to go into the backstory...that whole scene was awkward to me, like 5 minutes of talking about and hinting at things that have never been brought up before and will never be brought up again. They should have just dropped it altogether.

I don't miss a lot of that other stuff, though. The story about Neville's parents is condensed just fine in the film, for example. Also the aftermath in Order of the Phoenix with Harry ranting against Dumbledore might have been a great scene but I don't think Daniel Radcliffe was up to that...

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The story doesn't make sense!

A competition spread over a whole school year? WTF?

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

5 was Yates' worst film Jason. HBP was great!

Wasn't HBP the one that looked like it was shot through a fucking lemon?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

No

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[gkgyver 1,645]

I lost interest in the series as proper book adaptions once they decided to not bother with Dumbledore's funeral.

Numbskulls.

David Yates fucked the series up.

[Offline 29]

5 was Yates' worst film Jason. HBP was great!

Wasn't HBP the one that looked like it was shot through a fucking lemon?

Yeah. It has this weird yellowish look for some reason.

Its yellow when it needs to be yellowish...how do expect it to look when almost everything is fire-lit. Scenes like Opening, Sectumsempra, The Cave, the Tower, all have a blue-ish tone. It's not all yellow.

5 was fine but they shouldn't have cut all the fun stuff they get up to in the Ministry of Magic

6 was a pretty empty film. The death of Dumbledore should have had a much bigger impact

5 is the worst of the entire series. I think the only things that actually stand out in that movie are Umbridge and Luna. Everything else is chopped to bits. Not to mention the plotholes they created by decided to turn the longest book into the shortest movie. Not only is a sucky adaptation, but it's a sucky movie too.

I'll give you Dumbledore's Death in 6. Funeral should've been there. Everything else in 6 is pretty darn good.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

HBP is mostly exposition, some teen crap and not much else. The most redundant entry in the whole series.

What was wrong with the OOTP movie? I was glad they shaved off a lot of the superfluous crap in the book. That one's only the longest because JKR just didn't know when to friggen stop!

[mrbellamy 6,293]

Personally, I think Umbridge could have been nastier. Staunton was an ideal casting choice, but in terms of the writing, I missed that twisted feeling I had in the book whenever she would show up unannounced to deliver some unwarranted punishment or simply belittle others. She was a creep, a true villain and they took a lot of the edge off her by condensing all that material into comedic, even slapstick-y montages....it's odd, people complain about David Yates not being light enough but OOTP's kinda bouncy and casual despite the doom and gloom of the story. The Ministry restrictions are basically a goof and Dumbledore's Army is like a fun adventure. I may be in the minority here, but Harry's Caps Lock rants aside, I liked the general feeling of outrage Rowling displayed in that book, long and messy though it is, and the film doesn't have much bite. Actually, it makes Hogwarts feel warmer and safer than in HBP, which doesn't make a lot of sense.

[Bilbo 3,709]

So I'm out of the loop for a little while and when I come back I find that we're only missing one complete score from this series and of course it's Azkaban.

Sigh.

[Jilal 569]

Give it ... a few more years.

[Bilbo 3,709]

But I want it now

[Jilal 569]

So does everyone here, really.

That said - it is odd that this is the only entry in the series that hasn't yet leaked.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

But I want it now

[Bilbo 3,709]

So does everyone here, really.

That said - it is odd that this is the only entry in the series that hasn't yet leaked.

Especially when the other two Williams' scores leaked.

But I want it now

I don't do the whole singing and dancing routine.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jilal 569]

EDIT: Got more or less ninja'd by BloodBoal. Damn you!

The more a score is craved for, the less likely a leak becomes.

Imagine yourself as being someone who has received the recording sessions of a score on condition that you would not share them. If you're aware that said score in question is generally craved for, wouldn't you be rather hesitant to trade it or even just give it to certain people, even if you're fairly convinced they are to be trusted?

[Bilbo 3,709]

Yeah, I guess it's the fact it's so sought after.

I assume this is why no Star Wars sessions have ever leaked.

[Once 605]

Staunton was an ideal casting choice

Had she not been cast as Pomona Sprout in Chamber of Secrets Miriam Margolyes would have been an amazing Umbridge. But like you said, it would have needed a huge re-write too.

[Arpy 4,145]

Can we talk about the missed opportunity to go into Voldy's backstory with more Pensieve travels as per the book in Half-Blood Prince? In those chapters in the book we learn of the Horcrux Ring and Voldy's heritage. Instead in the film so much time is devoted to fluff like the Burrow being set on fire and pointless chases.

[Jay 37,374]

Yea, that's a shame.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

It was awful in the book. Like a clipshow episode.

[Jay 37,374]

Disagree!

[Once 605]

Me too. And it slowly, but surely built a realistic relationship between Harry and Dumbledore. A relationship that actually meant something.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Not sure what the point of all this information about the villain was supposed to accomplish, aside from demystifying him.

It all ends in a big wizard laser fight in the next one anyway.

[Jay 37,374]

The movies got Dumbledore's character all wrong once Gambon took over, which is a huge damn shame.

[Arpy 4,145]

Movies don't have time I guess.

[Jay 37,374]

No, the filmmakers chose to spend the time they had on the wrong things.

And didn't take a page from LOTR's book and film more movie than you needed for a theatrical cut to make extended cuts available on home video, which is a shame.

[Arpy 4,145]

Demystifying Voldemort, it reveals Voldemort was as flawed and vulnerable as anyone was. Didn't we learn in those scenes he was a Half-Blood? The significance of the Horcruxes?

Yes, Lord of the Rings is in my books a successful transcription from book to screen without compromising too much.

Yet HBP was a crucial development of the series which needed a more faithful adaptation.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Demystifying Voldemort, it reveals Voldemort was as flawed and vulnerable as anyone was.

I don't really care. It's as bad as all the crap we learned about Michael Myers in the Halloween sequels. It's too much information.

[Arpy 4,145]

I disagree but I think I understand your perspective.

[Once 605]

The movies got Dumbledore's character all wrong once Gambon took over, which is a huge damn shame.

I'd argue that Cuarón knew how to use him, when he was cast. But it's true, I always hoped for Peter O'Toole, once Harris passed.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Would the film makers have been able to make better choices about what to focus on it the book series had been finished before the films started?

[Once 605]

You'd think, but the first film they made after all books were published was Half-Blood Prince, and they didn't set up Deathly Hallows at all. Everything that could have helped setting up Hallows was cut.

[Jay 37,374]

The movies got Dumbledore's character all wrong once Gambon took over, which is a huge damn shame.

I'd argue that Cuarón knew how to use him, when he was cast. But it's true, I always hoped for Peter O'Toole, once Harris passed.

I didn't mean to imply that Gambon is to blame for screwing up the portrayal of his character (though personally, I don't feel that he did a great job), just that the writers got him right in HP1 and HP2 and when while we learn a lot more about him in Books 5-8, the movies don't really cover any of that or ever portray him as the complicated man he is.

You're right, he was mostly fine in HP3, and everybody was off (always yelly and shouty) in HP4... maybe it was Yates who didn't get him. Didn't he say in an interview he viewed Dumbledore as like the leader of an army, and Potter as his general, or something like that? Totally different than Rowling's intentions....

Would the film makers have been able to make better choices about what to focus on it the book series had been finished before the films started?

I don't think so. HP1-4 were already published when they began developing the movies, and the final book came out beween movies 5 and 6. They could have kept the stuff in Film 6 they knew would be important for Film 7/8 but... didn't.

[Giftheck 917]

The films made several mistakes and omissions. For instance, the omission of the revelation that Voldemort tried to kill Harry owing to the prophecy, the omission of much of Tom Riddle's backstory... the omissions and mistakes that would have made the films make more sense are numerous and all glaringly obvious from OotP onwards.

[Once 605]

The movies got Dumbledore's character all wrong once Gambon took over, which is a huge damn shame.

I'd argue that Cuarón knew how to use him, when he was cast. But it's true, I always hoped for Peter O'Toole, once Harris passed.

I didn't mean to imply that Gambon is to blame for screwing up the portrayal of his character (though personally, I don't feel that he did a great job), just that the writers got him right in HP1 and HP2 and when while we learn a lot more about him in Books 5-8, the movies don't really cover any of that or ever portray him as the complicated man he is.

You're right, he was mostly fine in HP3, and everybody was off (always yelly and shouty) in HP4... maybe it was Yates who didn't get him. Didn't he say in an interview he viewed Dumbledore as like the leader of an army, and Potter as his general, or something like that? Totally different than Rowling's intentions....

I agree. It's to do with the writing and directing.

Newell wanted Hogwarts to feel rougher and classic boarding-school-ish, and Dumbledore definitely suffered from that. And Yates had a - in my opinion - weird take on the character. It always felt off.

I loved that Cuarón played up Dumbledore's funkiness, something that was almost cut from Harris' version. If they could have found a balance between those, I would have been much more satisfied, haha.

[Jay 37,374]

Yup, I agree!

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I remember the mentality going around at the time was that omissions were fine because everyone watching the movies should read the books to find out. People with this attitude had no clue about why a film is weak if it can't stand on its own without demanding people to read its source material.

[mrbellamy 6,293]

The movies got Dumbledore's character all wrong once Gambon took over, which is a huge damn shame.

I'd argue that Cuarón knew how to use him, when he was cast. But it's true, I always hoped for Peter O'Toole, once Harris passed.

I didn't mean to imply that Gambon is to blame for screwing up the portrayal of his character (though personally, I don't feel that he did a great job), just that the writers got him right in HP1 and HP2 and when while we learn a lot more about him in Books 5-8, the movies don't really cover any of that or ever portray him as the complicated man he is.

You're right, he was mostly fine in HP3, and everybody was off (always yelly and shouty) in HP4... maybe it was Yates who didn't get him. Didn't he say in an interview he viewed Dumbledore as like the leader of an army, and Potter as his general, or something like that? Totally different than Rowling's intentions....

I agree. It's to do with the writing and directing.

Newell wanted Hogwarts to feel rougher and classic boarding-school-ish, and Dumbledore definitely suffered from that. And Yates had a - in my opinion - weird take on the character. It always felt off.

I loved that Cuarón played up Dumbledore's funkiness, something that was almost cut from Harris' version. If they could have found a balance between those, I would have been much more satisfied, haha.

It's weird that Dumbledore in particular changed so much with each director, like they could never pin him down. Columbus saw him as a kind grandfatherly figure, Cuaron saw him as an eccentric, Newell saw him as gruff and constantly agitated (by far the weirdest interpretation...I can only assume that was an attempt to add tension to the story) and then Yates kind of took it back to Richard Harris's austerity but with less warmth. Like Jay said, more of an army general or PM than a grandpa. Not much personality. I wonder if the same changes would have happened with Harris, since we only saw him under Columbus...none of the other characters were nearly that inconsistent in their characterization.

The one personality trait that I felt none of the films really quite got, though, was that Dumbledore was an intellectual. That was always my favorite thing about him, he was written as a curious and worldly person, reflective, empathetic, someone who knew a lot about a lot and could speak on a number of subjects but also a little lost in his own head. She even characterized him as a music lover. He was a teacher, first and foremost, an academic with a pet bird and who decorated his office with books and old artifacts. While the first three films had more of that kind of thing, it was completely lost in the fourth one, and then just a few bits and pieces in the Yates films. One example for me is his demeanor in the fifth movie when he has to defend Harry in the courtroom...the book had him taking a fairly diplomatic approach, his confidence and common sense contrasting with Fudge's flustered paranoia to convince the jury, whereas in the movie he was more impatient, forceful and intimidating. It got harder and harder to picture the movie version taking a walk, listening to music, or reading a novel in his spare time as opposed to like...intensely poring over battle strategies or something. They even got rid of his reading glasses before too long.