Lumos Nox the Books vs. the Movies | light the dark swish + flick |
Because i saw Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone twice before i read the book i had nothing to compare the movie to for accuracy or backstory. Such is very obviously not the case for this movie's sequels, but seeing the Sorcerer's Stone on video before reading it slightly skewed my perception of the entire series, though not as much as one might think. For instance when i think of Harry i don't automatically picture him in my head as Daniel Radcliffe: i inwardly have a very clear perception that's inspired both by the movie version (Dan, obviously) as well as a book version (as illustrated by Mary GrandPré). I've always felt that Harry (the way i imagine him) combines the best of what he was and is inspired by while my subconscious also adds some details of my own, details that make the character seem realer and clearer. This is never truer with any character than it is with Albus Dumbledore for as much as i love Richard Harris and all he did for the character, even he could not really do our beloved headmaster justice. As venerable an actor as he was he could not come even close to Dumbledore's power and nobility. I feel like Michael Gambon is hardly in the Prisoner of Azkaban, but i don't really feel he did much better. He decided to focus on Dumbledore's eccentricities and neglected to relate just how powerful and wise Dumbledore is. As much as i love both of these actors in other roles, i believe that Dumbledore is just such of an enigma that there isn't anyone on the planet who can do the character justice. It's very obvious to me that if you haven't read the books you won't know the discrepencies between film and print (this has particularly true of PoA: a lot of important details were left out for no discernable reason). I know for certain that there is no way TPTB can fit the Goblet of Fire into two and a half hours as they are currently trying to do: too much will have to be left out. The Order of the Phoenix will only be even more problematic. I love each of the films in their own way, but at the same time there is so much about them that bothers me. As a rule i can't fault the actor's performances because most parts have been excellently cast. It's little things that have been left out or changed mostly... That's part of the reason i want so very desperately to continue working on this page, because as much as i do love Dan, Emma, Rupert, and the rest, i know that (as great as they are) they are nowhere near as awesome as the character Rowling gave us in the books. The movie screen simply cannot capture the heart of her stories or the intricies of the plot. So let me just say that i love the movies, but if you're looking at them hoping to understand the content of the books, you're missing out. The movies are good, but compared to the books they're only substandard. Rowling's writing is excellent and can't truly be matched. The content simply isn't all there in the movies (and that's a bad thing in most respects). So if you're daunted by the size and length of the books in the Harry Potter series, don't be: they may be heavy, they may be long, but you won't be able to put them down. You'd be surprised how quickly you'll get through them.
in His love, |
Lumos Nox * source * blue pilgrim (warning: young believer on fire)
rogue.fire.angel@gmail.com
Harry Potter, Ron Weasley, Hermione Granger,
and all related characters and elements are the property of
J.K. Rowling, Scholastic, and Warner Bros.
last updated
04 * 02 * 07
563