The popularity of Harry Potter, which doesn't strike me as any good even in terms of children's literature, is an indicator of cultural decline. Last month I pointed out how much better popular music was in 1955, the movie comparison is just as unfavorable for the present day.
I'll eventually see it, having already seen six of the eight. But Book 7 was a disappointment, a drive on rails in which no one did anything untelegraphed. Maybe on film it'll have more dramatic urgency.
Poor Harry Potter. Had to open against the Palin biopic, The Undefeated, and got absolutely hammered at the box office.
You'd think marketers would be a little more savvy in their timing...
I read and enjoyed, but am not fanatically devoted to, the books. I've seen each of the movies so far and while I get enough out of them to continue seeing them, I wouldn't be bothering if the movies were my only exposure to the material.
As the books have gotten longer and more complicated, the amount of material excised to adapt each one into a manageable-length movie has grown. At this point the movies strike me as skeletal depictions of major plot events, with no connective tissue to animate them. Since I generally could care less about what happens to Harry (he's easily the least interesting and, except for flat-out villains, least sympathetic, character in the entire saga and I half suspect he's intentionally bland and uninteresting in order to serve simply as a place-holder for reader substitution) the focus on ONLY major plot developments omits much of the charm for me. For me the appeal of the books is in the humor and the random absurdities of the magical world, not in big fight scenes.
Part 1 held a lot more suspense and emotion for me, a guy who has never read the books and won't. It was even somewhat draining and worrysome; I had a physical reaction to the film. Part 2 seems to, as others have suggested, travel from Point A to Point B in a logical and predictable fashion.
I would say some of the drama is leeched out of the finale by several flashbacks and expository sections that explain, basically, what will happen to Harry 15 minutes later.
That said, I'm pleased with how it ended. I think David Simon said something about how if you build a story arc, you have to finish where that arc ends, and I think you can say that about HP.
lol call of duty black ops made twice as much money in 24 hours as this movie made over a 3-day weekend
and when modern warfare 3 comes out in november it will crush even black ops' sales figures
I got more styles than prison got bricks- ain't that some shit?
Re: Most Profitable Movie Evar
Tue Jul 19, 2011 at 01:23:48 AM EST
"Call of Duty: Black Ops has surpassed the $1 billion worldwide sales mark after just six weeks of availability, Activision announced today"
ie HP has hit half a billion in worldwide gross in a single weekend, and Call of Duty took six weeks to hit one billion. I think you were comparing the DOMESTIC sales of HP to the worldwide sales of CoD (which did 360 mil worldwide in the first weekend, while Potter did 160-something domestically)
And a copy of CoD: Black Ops costs 6X what a movie ticket costs...
Re: Most Profitable Movie Evar
Tue Jul 19, 2011 at 03:39:24 AM EST
Funny how both CoD Black Ops and Harry Potter are for nerdy virgins with acne.
Re: Why Do Y'all Always Bring Up My Job
Tue Jul 19, 2011 at 08:02:42 AM EST
nerdy virgins with acne
A joke, and I get that-- but when it comes to Harry Potter, you are dead wrong.
Ex ignorantia ad sapientiam; e luce ad tenebras
I think the movie was excellent. It is most profitable movie due to its characters,story line and special effects..