Alpha Seeking Alpha (E, 4k, abo)
Maybe it’s taboo, but Louis can’t stop thinking about a strong alpha holding him down and filling him with a knot. Louis may be alpha himself yet there’s a corner of the internet where he can get what he wants. He finally has the courage to do it.
And the Truth Shall Set You Free (Maybe…) (E, 18k, abo)
Betism: A religion based on the belief that the beta gender has been chosen by God to protect and defend the purity and dignity of the human race by resisting and condemning the lustful ways and flawed biology of the alpha and omega
Harry is a Betist and Louis is an alpha who runs with a bad crowd. This is what happens when two worlds collide.
Captain Jack (E, 32k, abo)
Louis has been searching for something and Harry is there to give it to him. Drugs, sex, disappointment, and the tangled web they’ve woven that keeps them trapped in the same cycle.
Everything Comes Back To You (10k, abo)
Louis was only seven when he found himself in a hospital bed alone and scared, confused about what was happening. When another little boy climbed into his bed to comfort him, Louis never thought that they would be meeting again later in life. He also never imagined that their roles would be reversed the second time around.
Everything I need I get from you (M, 10k, abo)
In a world where music and sound are just as vital to health as food, Harry is stuck in a town that thinks professional music is a scam and a relationship he never wanted. One chance event changes his life.
Going Live (E, 15k)
Harry has only done this cam thing a handful of times when another camboy pops in to view his stream and unintentionally stirs things up a bit.
Or Louis and Harry are both camboys for some extra cash and meet each other in an unconventional way
I’m Sure It Happens To All Alphas (E, 4k, abo)
“It’s okay. I’m sure it happens to all alphas at some point,” the omega beside him said which only embarrassed him even more.
The thing was that this was not how Louis expected their first time together to play out. Especially after he’d been fantasizing about it for so long.
But let’s jump back to the beginning.
or Louis has trouble popping a knot
Just Jump (E, 10k, abo)
Finally, after years of suffering alone, the insurance plan at Harry’s new job covered omega heat services. As a grown omega adult, it finally felt like the right time to try it out. And, since taking an entire week of heat leave would really put him behind at work, using a service to shorten it seemed like a responsible decision. At least that’s how he rationalized it. He was nervous about his decision but it was too late. The doorbell rang.
“Hi!” The alpha said again and Harry took the hand he offered and shook it firmly. “I’m Louis from Omega Services. It’s nice to meet you.”
20 more fics below...
Knot Safe For Work (E, 6k, abo)
The world is magical, Louis is a wizard, Harry is a Were, there are spells for lube and supernatural kinks are definitely a thing.
Merry Birthday (10k, abo)
Harry Styles and Louis Tomlinson have unfortunate soulmarks branded onto their skin. The first words their soulmate will ever speak to them are two of the most common greetings, so common that they don’t even notice when it finally happens for real.
A Christmas soulmate AU.
OmegaVision (E, 24k, abo)
Tomlin Networks Presents: OmegaVision starring Louis Tomlinson! The world’s first 24/7 reality channel available in over 150 countries worldwide following the life of the first male omega born in over a century. Follow Louis through his daily routine, the ups and downs of growing up or just leave him on for comfort. There are many reasons to tune in but, no matter what yours may be, there’s always a part of Louis that is just like you!
Or a Truman Show au that nobody asked for where Louis is Truman and Harry just wants to be his mate
Out of the Wild (E, 21.5k, abo)
Louis has spent most of his life as a wolf in the wild, Harry has spent most of his life as a human in the city. Their worlds collide during the audition process for the hottest new singing competition. What happens next should have expected.
Out With The Old, In With The New (E, 7k, abo)
Harry becomes the pack’s new alpha and Louis can’t wait to be bred
The Post-War BP (E, 18k, abo)
The eight year war has left the country’s birthrate severely stunted with a lack of virile alphas left to bring it back up. To ensure the survival of the country, the government opens The Breeding Program where young omegas can apply to carry an alpha’s child in exchange for benefits. Louis’ family is struggling and the BP is one of the only ways to secure a roof over their heads. Harry was drafted at the age of eighteen and spent six years of his life defending a country he doesn’t recognize when he returns home. The government made the bed but it’s Harry that has to lie in it.
Restless Lane (E, 15k, abo)
Louis had grown used to his boring life back in Mississippi as a stand-in father figure to his siblings. He never expected his childhood friend to show up on his lawn with the heat of summer or that he would remind Louis how much of himself he'd tucked away and neglected. He also never expected to find himself caught up in a tangled web of feelings or secrets that just might break him. Maybe he had never known Harry at all.
Save Some Luck For Me (E, 10.5k, abo)
Louis arrives at the 2018 Winter Olympics to make history as the first omega to win a gold medal at the games. Harry, his oiled up crush from the Summer Olympics, just happens to show up to sabotage him, but maybe helps him win in the end.
Sisterwives (E, 33k, abo)
This was it, the moment Louis had been waiting for his entire life. Giddy excitement bubbled up as he held hands and stared up at his soon-to-be alpha and husband and grinned. The ceremony was small and simple, but Louis didn’t mind. Fresh flowers pinned into his hair and a brand new outfit was all he needed to feel special in front of their few witnesses. It was just some members of his family and a few of the church elders in attendance as was customary for any marriage beyond the first wife within the faith.
First wives were the ones to have elaborate weddings with the whole community involved. An alpha’s first wedding was a celebration of an their coming of age, his first steps into fulfilling God’s prophecy. There were many glories for an omega that came with being a first wife but also many responsibilities. Louis had never aspired to be a first wife or even a second. He wasn’t experienced enough to be the leader of an alpha’s many wives and children and he didn’t think he’d be up to the task.
Louis was just fine in the position he was stepping into as the seventh.
Or Louis thinks he's getting everything he's ever dreamed of. Harry helps him find what makes him truly happy.
Stay Close, Hold Steady (E, 27k, abo)
Found on the banks of the Mississippi as an toddler, Harry goes on a quest to find his biological family. Louis tries to be supportive, but maybe he just doesn’t want to be left behind.
Take What’s Mine (E, 15k, abo)
Years after he is kidnapped, his life altered forever, Louis goes through the motions in a way that barely feels like living. Harry is a wild card, a forbidden fruit that Louis swore off of before he even had a chance to experience it. Maybe, in the end, Harry holds the key to being reborn. Louis just has to be open to the idea first.
Tell Me That You Want It Cause I Already Know (E, 3.8k, abo)
Who knew all it would take was some good ole porn for Louis to discover his friend, Harry, is a wolf and for it to awaken an urge that would bring them together in a way he hadn’t anticipated.
Tiny Exaggeration (E, 4k, abo)
Louis is frustrated that they've been dating for months and still haven't taken their relationship to the next level. Sometimes the foolishness of the past lingers in the present. Louis wants that to change.
Was It All Fake? (E, 4k, abo)
Unmated omegas are second class citizens. Expected to provide for themselves yet paid so little that they often are overworked or forced to sell their bodies just to keep from starving. Louis’ luck turns around when he meets Harry, the rich heir to a fortune. After their bonding ceremony, things aren’t exactly what Louis expected.
Where Do We Go Now (E, 10k, abo)
Louis goes off to college ready to start a fresh life away from the oppressive alphas of his pack. The odds aren’t in his favour when his new dorm mate turns out to be an alpha. Louis hates alphas.
The Wilds (E, 13k, abo)
The creatures that Louis observed every day weren’t exactly human, but yet they were. Researchers had plucked some of them from their secluded island and transplanted them into an enclosure against their will like a bunch of zoo animals. Louis didn’t think they were. But he was only paid to do the yardwork, he didn’t have any say about the wilds that lived there. That was until an unfortunate accident changed his life forever and made one wild in particular his top priority.
Woke Up Feeling Knotty (E, 8k, abo)
Beta Louis has a kink for knotting and the secret aesthetic porn blog he runs about it is more than proof. When he accidentally finds out his alpha best friend Harry is one of his biggest fans, he knows he has to come clean after everything that has already happened between them. Harry just might be willing to help him out anyway.
You Gotta Swim, Swim For Your Life
Swim When It Hurts - Part One (M, 12k, abo)
Harry never thought he would find himself battling cancer. Louis never thought he would find himself so attached to one of his patients.
Swim When It Hurts - Part Two (E, 6k, abo)
Harry never thought he would find himself battling cancer. Louis never thought he would find himself so attached to one of his patients. Neither one of them thought they would find love in such an unlikely place.
Swim When It Hurts - Part Three (E, 7k, abo)
Harry never thought he would find himself battling cancer. Louis never thought he would find himself so attached to one of his patients. Neither one of them thought they would find love in such an unlikely place. Maybe things weren’t ideal, but finding strength in a new kind of normal together may be just what they need.
155 notes
·
View notes
As If By Magic
by Dan H
Tuesday, 15 December 2009Dan actually liked the movie of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince~
Last week, Kyra and I purchased the movie version of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince.
We bought it along with Twilightwith the intent of settling down to an awful movie night. Twilight was indeed rubbish (although I totally heart Robert Pattinson, he's so cute) but my reaction to the Harry Potter movie went something like this:
“This is going to be awful, isn't it. Hey, I'm sure that the book didn't start with Harry sitting in a Muggle cafeteria. Hey, why is Harry chatting up a Muggle waitress, that makes him look ... mature. Oh here's Dumbledore. Hey, this looks weirdly sinister in a non-wanky way. Hey, here's the meeting with Slughorn and hey, he's not horrendously fat, what's going on here? And here's the Hogwarts express and wow, this whole thing is starting to feel like some kind of post-world-war-two spy movie with a genuine air of oppression and danger. And is that Lavender Brown? She seems like a nice girl who's actually good for Ron. And the romance seems to work. And it feels like a school. What the hell?”
So yeah. It worked, it worked surprisingly well.
All Growed Up
I have long felt that one of Rowling's many flaws as a children's writer is that she writes her teenage characters from the viewpoint of an adult. This has, ironically, won her a great deal of praise from her adult readers, who go on about how realistic her portrayals of teenagers are – this is because most adults have no respect for teenagers. Harry spends the vast majority of his time (at least after book five) having adolescent tantrums, obsessing about stupid things and screaming in CAPSLOCK, and grown-up readers look at him and say “wow, that is exactly what teenagers are like”.
Of course back in the dim distant past, the Potter books were designed for children. Children absolutely do not believe themselves to be irrational or immature. They believe themselves to be entirely capable of getting by on their own, thank you very much. Good children's books portray children as they see themselves, while really good children's books walk the narrow path between the two, presenting children in whom children recognise themselves, and in whom adults recognise their children, or themselves as children.
What this means in a roundabout way is that the Potter books feel deeply stupid because you're sitting there going “for fuck's sake, Harry is a kid and you are a grown-up why are you leaving this all up to him you stupid prat?” It doesn't help that CAPSLOCK aside, Harry doesn't change that much between book one and book six. There's always some part of him that feels like a twelve year old, and the Hogwarts students always feel like a “bunch of twelve year olds” to me at least.
Here the film gets a remarkable leg-up from the simple fact that the cast have all - well - grown up, and have often grown up in ways that neither Rowling nor the producers could have ever predicted. The Order of the Phoenix movie, for example, really struggled with the fact that Dursley had gone from a comical fatty to quite a buff young man (they compensated by turning him into a chav, but he still didn't look anything like book-Dursley any more).
Just to give you some examples, here are some photographs of the actors from the movie:
Ladies and gentlemen: Neville Longbottom.
The chubby kid whose pure-blood status was never quite good enough to put him on a par with Harry has grown up into ... well ... that.
And if you think that's scary, try this:
May I please introduce Miss Ginevra Weasley.
And of course, lest we forget:
Famous Harry Potter.
And for what it's worth, that's a shot from Equus, so it's actually quite an old picture.
Anyway, point being, the later Potter books require Harry to do some quite serious, quite grown-up things. In the book this is stupid, because Harry never stops feeling like a twelve-year-old kid. In the movie it works remarkably well, because they suddenly really look like young adults. The fact that the actors are all basically adults now (Radcliffe is twenty at time of writing) combined with a script that removes a lot of the cutsier elements of the text makes the whole thing feel weirdly serious in a way that Rowling never allowed it to be.
The other thing that struck me about the casting is the weird parallel between the cast and the characters. Harry Potter is, after all, a boy who is plucked out of obscurity at the age of eleven, and suddenly finds himself cast into a world in which he is more famous than he can really imagine. This is of course exactly what happened to Daniel Radcliffe when he was cast as Harry Potter some eight years ago, and so there's a sense in which Radcliffe, playing Harry, is really playing himself. Similarly, Bonnie Wright was cast as Ginny at the age of nine – she's been playing the same role for literally half of her life.
Even more interestingly, because the cast – particularly the long-running cast members (you get it far less with the likes of Luna) – were chosen because of the way they looked when they were twelve, they've often developed in unexpected ways which have actually added a peculiar amount of nuance to their characters that Rowling could not have imagined. Of course it's often just visual, but visual isn't the same as superficial – cinema is a visual medium after all.
For example, take this shot of Harry and Ginny in the Room of Requirement:
Now there's several things I'd like to take a look at here. First off, I know it's a small thing, but Ginny is actually taller than Harry. She also doesn't really have red hair any more, it's darkened with age to the point where she's really more of a brunette. I know it sounds finnicky, but these two things actually do more to make me invest in Ginny as a character than pretty much anything else (well, that and the fact that she's suddenly developed this really remarkable, rather sexy, speaking voice).
In Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (the book) Harry suddenly realises that he fancies Ginny. The problem is that Ginny in the books isn't really a person. Pretty much every trait she possesses defines her purely in relation to somebody else. She's Ron's little sister. She has red hair like Harry's mother (nothing Oedipal about that, oh no). She's brave and good at Quittitch, like Harry (but not quite as good as Harry – that wouldn't be attractive at all).
Movie!Ginny is a very different person. She certainly no longer looks like Lily Evans, and she's lost the characteristic hair colour that marks her out as a Weasley. She's taller than Harry, and in the language of the visual arts, height is frequently a marker for status – hence Voldemort is tall as is Dumbledore, Pettigrew is small (and fat, of course) as is pretty much any secondary character who wasn't cast at the age of twelve.
In the book, Harry's sudden attraction to Ginny was nonsensical, not least because Rowling clearly had no interest in making sense of it. She had obviously always known that they were going to wind up together and it was just a case of getting from point A (“She's Ron's little sister”) to point B (“Marriage”) via the shortest possible straight line which, for some inexplicable reason, involved chest monsters. Rowling transparently couldn't work out why Harry would be interested in Ginny, because she clearly had no idea why any teenager was attracted to any other teenager beyond some vague notions about hormones.
In the movie, however, you can totally see why Harry suddenly notices Ginny, because she's completely changed, and not in an annoying bat-bogey-hex personality transplant way, in a “hey, this is what happens when people grow up” way. Movie!Ginny looks like a person in her own right who Harry might genuinely be interested in (it also helps that movie!Harry has been shown taking a genuine interest in girls, see the Muggle waitress in scene one), book!Ginny is this scary composite of other people designed purely to provide Harry with children to name after his dead relatives.
I'd also point out that if you look closely at the Harry-Ginny picture above, Harry has a distinct five-o-clock shadow.
Canon to the Left of them, Canon to the Right of Them
I freely admit that I only used subheadings in this article because I really wanted to use that line.
The Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince movie has an unusual relationship with canon. Interestingly, it's a relationship that we've talked about before here on Ferretbrain, one that can broadly be summed up by three major points:
The film must contain only events which are part of canon.
If the book doesn't say it didn't happen, it can have happened, and still be canon.
If the book says it did happen, and you don't say it didn't, you can ignore it, and still be canon
Kyra once mocked me for observing, after a particularly peculiar production of Measure for Measure (or possibly Richard the Third) that I'd never quite realised how much flexibility you had within the script of a play to reinterpret the events of said play – often to the point of completely reversing their implications or context (Kyra being an English grad thought that this was so obvious it wasn't worth saying). I pointed out that you could do completely mad things like having a production of Hamlet in which Ophelia didn't die – on the grounds that you never see it happen, and you could perfectly well put her onstage and have her interact with people, as long as you didn't give her any lines. Kyra responded to this with a certain amount of patient condescension. Imagine my surprise, then, when I found that myself watching a film which did almost exactly that.
For example, in the book there is a chapter entitled A Very Frosty Christmas. In this sequence Harry and co go back to the Burrow for Christmas, Ginny is rude about Fleur and – well actually that's sort of it.
In the movie the equivalent sequence involves Harry and co going back to the burrow at some point and the Death Eaters attacking it and burning it down. Because there's nothing in the book to say they don't. And the whole sequence is curiously silent and nobody ever mentions it. They were, it seemed, perfectly happy to have the event take place on screen, but could not bring themselves to change the “script” Rowling laid out before them.
What's amazing is how well this winds up working. The film essentially uses silent images and the judicious omission of (many, many) irrelevant scenes in order to produce a text which, while it may have been inferred from the original, was certainly never implied by it.
On a related note, it's remarkable how much better the story becomes when you take out all of the irrelevant stuff – if you ever needed evidence that less is indeed more, watch the Half Blood Prince movie after reading the book. Suddenly instead of Dumbledore telling Harry that “aah, there is something very important you have to be doing” and then – well – not making any progress in that direction whatsoever, he says “Harry, it is very important that you do this” and then tells him what it is, and then Harry does it, with hundreds of pages of meaningless twaddle excised.
Similarly, the director seems to have abandoned the idea that there should be a “mystery” about what Draco is up to – throughout the film we see him working on the vanishing cabinet, in a series of short flashes which are reminiscent of the Prestige (there's even a sequence with an apple and a caged bird). What we don't get is Harry obsessing about what Draco is up to, despite the fact that he's supposed to have an important job to do. What we don't get is Apparition lessons and – to be honest – that much of the actual Half-Blood Prince plotline.
Fight the Cuteness
Every so often, when watching the film, I'd say to myself “was that in the book? I don't think that was in the book.” Twice I found myself thinking quite clearly “that was in the book, but in the book it sucked.”
These two scenes were as follows:
First is the sequence in which Ron tries out for Quiddich. As you might recall, he starts off doing badly, then Harry gives him Self Confidence (tm) and he does well.
When things are going badly, the Slytherins make up a Mean Song to sing to poor Won-Won. The song goes like this:
Weasley is our king!
Weasley is our king!
Always lets the quaffle in!
Weasley is our king!
Aside from forming a keystone in the “Dumbledore is Ron from the Future” theory, this was lame, cutesy and annoying. When Ron finally gets his shit together, the Gryffindors sing a variant of the song (yes I'm going to type it out again).
Weasley is our king!
Weasley is our king!
He didn't let the quaffle in!
Weasley is our king!
The same sequence appears in the film. However this time the mean song sung by the Slytherins is as follows:
Lo-ser! Lo-ser! Lo-ser!
And the triumphant variant sung by the Gryffindors is:
Weas-ley! Weas-ley! Weas-ley!
Both in a boisterous, locker-room tone.
Can you spot the difference? I'll give you a clue. One of them sounds like something that real people would actually say and one of them doesn't.
I think it was – actually embarrassingly I've forgotten his name, Mike Smith I think, the guy who did the Half-Blood Prince review – who observed that one of his major problems with the Potter series was that it was impossible to take all of the Dark Serious Themes seriously, because they were presented side-by-side with things like Sneakoskopes and Puking Pastilles.
It seems like a churlish complaint but it, well, isn't. Rowling would, I am sure, argue that the cutesy elements are there because it is a children's book. She would argue this because she has no respect for children. Children don't need bright lights and sugar coatings to understand things, they don't need to be spoon-fed watered-down versions of serious issues by patronising grown-ups (is that a mixed metaphor? I suppose you could water something down and then feed it to somebody with a spoon...) they are smart people who actually know quite a lot about the world.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is shot through with annoying cutesy crap that undermines the air of oppression Rowling is trying to create. The movie simply removes it (and again, Ginny is so much easier to like if we aren't being constantly reminded of her proficiency with the bat-bogey hex). Slughorn's gatherings are no longer called the “Slug Club” (well, Ron uses the term, but his tone is pejorative – again taking the same literal text but completely reversing the meaning).
The second clear example of this is in the final confrontation with the Death Eaters. In the book the DEs break in through the vanishing cabinet Snape kills Dumbledore (OMFG SPOILER!!) and then the Death Eaters fight their way out through the Hogwarts student body. In this battle three Death Eaters are killed, no members of the student body (who fight with full force using such devastating spells as the Jellylegs Jinx) are harmed. Yes, I believe the implication is that they used the Felix Felicitas but it still makes the DEs look really really dumb.
Then of course they confront Snape who gets called a coward whilst calmly refraining from killing Harry (and the tragic thing is that JK seems to really mean it). Harry uses Sectumsempra against him, and Snape replies:
You dare turn my own spells against me Potter? It was I who invented them! I, the Half-Blood Prince! And you'd turn your inventions on me like your filthy father would you? I don't think so ... no!
Dude.
In the film it goes like this. Snape Kills Dumbledore (OMFG SPOILER!!). The Death Eaters leave. On the way out Bellatrix walks along one of the tables in
Christchurch
the Great Hall, stamping on all the crockery and putting out the candles. The image of destruction is striking and remarkably affecting. There are no students, but they set fire to Hagrid's hut on the way out. Harry, alone, confronts the Death Eaters, Snape kicks his arse again, and says.
You dare turn my own spells against me Potter? Yes, I was the Half-Blood Prince.
Compare. The first is mad, cackling over-the-top villainy. The second is quiet and understated. The first seems to be there purely to explain where the book got its title, the second seems to be there to highlight how little Harry truly understands about his world.
Slughorn, Dumbledore, Philby
I have, before now, described the Harry Potter series as “the Secret Seven versus Hitler.” A plucky gang of school-age children take on a genocidal maniac with an army backing him up and somehow win.
Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (Movie Version) takes this pile of stupid and fail, and turns it on its head producing instead something reminiscent of the Cambridge Spies.
I've already mentioned how much the start of the film looks like a nineteen-fifties spy movie, with the Hogwarts express suddenly becoming this tiny, cramped thing straight out of Strangers on a Train. The air of fifties paranoia means that instead of the War in the Wizarding World feeling like a version World War Two fought by twelve-year-olds with stink bombs, it feels like a version of the Cold War being fought by powerful, cynical old men through their young proxies. Dumbledore works through Harry, Voldemort works through Draco, everything is silent and shadowed, and nothing is as it seems.
At the start of the film, Dumbledore makes a speech to the students at Hogwarts. He says two things in this speech which aren't in the book, and which make things very different. The first thing he says is that Voldemort used to be called Tom Riddle. Again this confused me when I heard it because something fandom (or at least the faintly bitter parts of fandom I hang out in) has been up in arms about since the series ended is the fact that Dumbledore (and for that matter Harry right up until the final confrontation) never called Voldemort by his real name. The second thing he says is that “the most powerful weapon in the coming battle is you”. Now if you think about it, that's positively chilling: here's Dumbledore, bastion of goodness, describing his students as weapons to be used in the war with Voldemort. It all conjures this image of a desperate, terrifying shadow-war being fought, where the weapons are knowledge and ideology and manipulation. What a contrast to the actual war, where the weapons are extendable ears, invisibility cloaks, and Expelliarmus.
This idea of a war fought through information and manipulation is reinforced throughout the film, and strangely it is most strongly reinforced through the character of Horace Slughorn. Rowling's Slughorn is in every respect an awful character. A glutton, a braggart and a fool (and worst of all, a fatty – fat equals evil remember) Slughorn is one of Rowling's vast army of despicable strawmen. He is weak, selfish and (horror of horrors) cowardly.
Movie!Slughorn is a much more subtle, much more interesting creature. When he is first introduced, Slughorn shows Harry his wall, showing pictures of his most successful former students. In the book, this makes him sound like a wanker. He brags about what his students have achieved, insists that they wouldn't be anything if not for him, and gloats about all the free stuff he gets. In the film he speaks about his ex students with genuine affection, and a sense of melancholy. You get the sense that he feels privileged to have been part of the lives of these remarkable young witches and wizards.
Throughout the film, Slughorn is played with a lightness of touch, and one is left with the impression that he really did make a difference to the lives of all of his students – at least the ones he singled out. Essentially Movie!Slughorn runs the closest thing that Hogwarts ever gets to a Gifted and Talented Students program – something which any modern institution would consider mandatory. One gets the impression that Rowling who – if I may make an impertinent assumption – does not give the impression of having been an especially bright spark at school feels that recognising the abilities of talented students is nothing more than favouritism. Movie Slughorn is altogether more complex, a difficult amalgam of your favourite teacher and your least favourite teacher, a little manipulative, a little selfish, but genuinely sincere in his desire to bring out the best in his students. It's a quality that's almost unheard of in a Hogwarts teacher.
The key to defeating Voldemort is knowledge and control. Slughorn has knowledge, and Dumbledore needs it. Dumbledore uses Harry to get at Slughorn's memory. Slughorn uses his students to validate himself, but Slughorn's students – both Harry and Voldemort - use him for their own purposes. Voldemort uses Draco to get at Dumbledore, and Dumbledore uses Snape to protect Draco and Harry. It's wheels within wheels on a scale Rowling never allowed us to imagine, because she would never allow us to interpret Dumbledore as being genuinely manipulative.
It is a film of bold and striking images – the repeated motif of Draco pulling the cover from the vanishing cabinet, the recurring shots of a birdcage, empty after Draco uses its occupant as part of his testing. All of the action takes place in long shadows and dark corridors, everything feels secretive and claustrophobic. Every significant interaction between the characters is couched in terms of secrets discovered and betrayed. When Riddle gets Slughorn to tell him how to make a Horcrux, and Slughorn – realising what he might have done – asks Tom to reassure him that “this is all academic, isn't it” (mirroring the excuse he himself gives for stealing valuable magical reagents) Tom replies “oh yes sir, and don't worry, this will be our little secret”. When Snape passes Harry on the way into the lightning-struck tower, he presses his finger to his lips, urging Harry to silence (again this is a change from the book, in which Harry is both invisible and paralysed throughout the whole incident).
The whole thing hangs together into an extremely strong, extremely satisfying film, which is at its weakest when it is forced to stick closely to canon. Ron's relationship with Lavender Brown, for example, is extremely convincing when she's just a pretty girl who happens to fancy him, but the moment they have to let her call him “Won-won” the whole thing just feels stupid. Even when constrained by the original narrative, however, they sometimes manage to salvage the most awful parts of the book. Agragog's funeral, for example, is very well handled, because they neither attempt to get a cheap laugh out of it, nor to make it genuinely moving. It's absurd, but not silly, if that distinction makes any sense.
So, umm, yes. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince well worth seven quid from Sainsburys.Themes:
J.K. Rowling
,
TV & Movies
,
Sci-fi / Fantasy
,
Young Adult / Children
~
bookmark this with - facebook - delicious - digg - stumbleupon - reddit
~Comments (
go to latest
)
Sister Magpie
at 21:27 on 2009-12-15Wow, this does make it sound good! I haven't seen it, but it does sound like this was one where they made some good choices. And I especially agree about the actors growing up. I think that's somewhat been true since the beginning. When real people or real kids had to say the lines, they often brought something to it that couldn't help but make it a little different.
One correction--in OotP the book Dudley also becomes a buff young man. You probably just don't remember it because he's essentially the same guy and never changes his personality. But he becomes a boxer, presumably so that he can be a bullying adult.
And also, looking back, perhaps as foreshadowing that Dudley was going to turn out not to be evil, which he proves he isn't by personally validating Harry's worth.
I find it funny to think of Ron's Quidditch story here, because it's actually his Quidditch story in OotP. But it works much better when combined with his story in HBP, because the story in that book was a complete retread with the tiny addition of that Felix Felicitas stuff.
permalink
-
go to top
Melissa G.
at 21:35 on 2009-12-15
(again this is a change from the book, in which Harry is both invisible and paralysed throughout the whole incident).
This was one of my favorite changes! It made Snape's betrayal that much more poignant because there was a moment there when Harry actually decided to trust him. As opposed to having no choice in the matter and being an incapacitated spectator. The fact that the movies can go outside of Harry's POV is a wonderful thing. I actually kind of feel like as the books got worse, the movies are getting better. I'm excited (and dreading) what they'll do with DH.
@Sister Magpie
By the way, I've been reading and LOVING your HP sporks on death to capslock. Just wanted to send love your way for those. ^^
permalink
-
go to top
http://descrime.livejournal.com/
at 21:43 on 2009-12-15Wow, that... actually makes me want to watch the movie. I never really thought about HP from that direction before, but it's true that HP suffers a failure of imagination when it comes to letting the characters grow up. In looks, in personalities, and in interests, all the characters are simply older versions of their child selves with only a few exceptions.
I think Rowling had good stories to tell children, but those stupid Houses kept her from allowing her characters to grow up in an interesting fashion, because it set the character's basic traits in stone at eleven. I could see why she invented them in the first place as an easy way to make the school seem smaller for Harry and the reader. I don't think she had planned on the scope of HP to be as large as it ended up.
permalink
-
go to top
Shim
at 22:17 on 2009-12-15So it looks like I'll have to give in and actually watch it. Should I watch the previous two as well?
There's a vague thought in my mind about the 'childish' elements of the books - Sneakoskopes and the like. That kind of thing, the mixture of fairly stark themes and absurdity, can actually work sometimes if you take a clear angle on it. So I've definitely read childrens' books where the absurdity takes over and people are merrily killed off, tortured (usually in ridiculous-sounding ways) and so on, without attempting to make those bits
ZOMG dark and serious
. At the other end, you can have Mature and Serious books with ridiculous ideas in - bits of Doctor Who (okay, that's rarely completely serious) spring to mind, but... well, Bouncing Bombs? Chasing off hordes of war elephants with music? And military types are prone to inventing irreverent nicknames, so frankly I can see hard-bitten SAS troopers talking about Puking Pastilles and Extendible Ears. The Biggles series, which are serious war stories despite the silly-sounding name, includes a really very sinister book that's mostly about deadly chewing-gum and another with insanity-causing flowers.
Offhand, the Deepwoods/Edge series does a reasonable job of combining silly and serious. For example, they have bizarre creatures and ridiculous outfits, but the people themselves take them perfectly seriously and some of the bizarre creatures are convincingly deadly.
permalink
-
go to top
Sister Magpie
at 01:01 on 2009-12-16
In looks, in personalities, and in interests, all the characters are simply older versions of their child selves with only a few exceptions.
And that's very central to the plot, after all. As Dan said in an article article on Ferretbrain I quite liked:
The problem with Potter is that the "real world" of the Potterverse is so utterly childish. Harry is growing up into a world where everybody is still obsessed with school, where the only person that He Who Must Not Be Named is afraid of is his old teacher, where three fifteen year old kids competing in a school sporting event is international news.
So Harry's journey is that of a child growing up and learning about the world, but what he learns is that there is no world outside of Hogwarts.
In GoF we saw hints of what people thought was a complex world, but instead of the world opening out what we really got was real-world things shrunk down to fit neatly inside Hogwarts: international diplomacy was like schools meeting for a tournament, but the principals squabble and we never hear from them again. The government is full of people who bustle around making copies and writing memos but not actually doing anything--except occasionally making rules about things like who gets to play Quidditch at school or whether or not the school groundskeeper can keep his job. Marriage is going to a dance with someone and actually enjoying it. The one guy the evil overlord is afraid of is the teacher none of the kids want to cross. Your job is the job that sounded cool to you at 12.
In this world it's not only believable it's expected that someone you hated at school you'll basically hate as an adult--which is necessary for the entire plot to work. Nobody in the whole series has a single motivation that wasn't created at school.
It actually works really well up until at least PoA, actually. I wonder if one of the reasons that book is so popular is that it's the high point of that kind of world-building when we look at Sirius, Snape and Lupin in the Shrieking Shack and the kids realize they were once just like them, but now they're adults. It's just ruined as they books try to follow the kids as they get older and you realize oh wait, it's not that they were once like kids, they are still kids. That's what changes it from a neat moment of seeing the kid inside the adult he now is to just...the first tip off that these characters are stunted.
permalink
-
go to top
Jamie Johnston
at 01:45 on 2009-12-16
I freely admit that I only used subheadings in this article because I really wanted to use that line.
And rightly so.
permalink
-
go to top
Sister Magpie
at 02:15 on 2009-12-16
@Sister Magpie
By the way, I've been reading and LOVING your HP sporks on death to capslock. Just wanted to send love your way for those. ^^
Thanks so much! I keep trying to get myself to do the last two I haven't done, but I don't think I could handle DH again.
permalink
-
go to top
Melissa G.
at 02:20 on 2009-12-16
I don't think I could handle DH again.
Definitely can't blame you for that one!
permalink
-
go to top
Montavilla
at 04:44 on 2009-12-16Thanks for the review. I think the books and the films have a very interesting relationship--partly because of the "faithfulness" shown by both sides. There was, I recall, some speculation that the main actors would be jettisoned mid-series and the parts recast with younger, cuter ones.
But the producers remained faithful to their original leads, and the actors have remained faithful to the series--the only major role that has been recast is Dumbledore and only because Richard Harris died.
I can't imagine that the cast hasn't rubbed off on JKR. I think that Emma Watson (who I felt was miscast as Hermione was written in the earlier books) must have influenced the later Hermione. Late series Hermione is a lot more weepy and emotional than early series Hermione.
I'm glad to hear you defend the burrow scene. This was criticized heavily by fans, since it was NOT in the book. But I thought it made the war--which in the book was conveyed entirely by Ron and Hermione reading bits from the newspaper--something that could affect the audience.
Also, it made the Lupin/Tonks romance more real than the book, using only two lines instead of the countless appearances of Tonks with brown hair. I love the way that films can do this.
permalink
-
go to top
Dan H
at 13:31 on 2009-12-16
I can't imagine that the cast hasn't rubbed off on JKR
Oh absolutely.
An observation I cut from an early draft of the article is that the HBP movie is interesting, because it's the film version of the first book which clearly shows the influence of the films. HBP Snape is *clearly* written with the idea that he would be played by Alan Rickman, so in the movie it comes full circle, and Rickman winds up playing Snape-as-played-by-Alan-Rickman.
Also, it made the Lupin/Tonks romance more real than the book, using only two lines instead of the countless appearances of Tonks with brown hair. I love the way that films can do this.
I found that it made Lupin/Tonks feel really creepy actually. You just look at her and realise that yes, he *really is* old enough to be her father.
permalink
-
go to top
Andy G
at 13:59 on 2009-12-16
Dumbledore uses Harry to get at Slughorn's memory. Slughorn uses his students to validate himself, but Slughorn's students – both Harry and Voldemort - use him for their own purposes.
Was it just me, or were there overtones of seduction in the Slughorn/Voldemort and Slughorn/Harry relationships? By which I don't mean to get all Daily Mail-esque ("Slughorn is a paedo") or anything like that, but it seems there's a subtle suggestion of the possibility of a dynamic of that sort between them which would actually fit well with the analysis you've given. It made Dumbledore's use of Harry to get at Slughorn seem particularly questionable and manipulative.
permalink
-
go to top
Dan H
at 15:15 on 2009-12-16I think there's certainly undertones (again, I think Riddle's use of the phrase "our little secret" was a deliberate choice) and there's certainly an implication that there's something not *entirely* appropriate about Slughorn.
But as you say, the film stays on the right side of OMG PAEDO!!
permalink
-
go to top
Montavilla
at 15:29 on 2009-12-16I got that vibe from the book. I thought it was an interesting change from book to film, that in the book Dumbledore tells Harry about Slughorn "collecting" students in order to warn him. But in the film, it's prelude to Harry asking, "Shall I let him?"
Which was all kinds of creepy.
As for Lupin/Tonks. I can see how that creeped you out, although it didn't for me. (If I can watch Sean Connery and Catherina Zeta-Jones as a couple, then anything's possible.) But regardless of the ickiness of it, they still seemed much more believable than they do in the book.)
:)
permalink
-
go to top
Arthur B
at 15:31 on 2009-12-16Also, I hate to be coarse, but the guy's name
is
Slughorn. That's quite disturbingly Freudian.
permalink
-
go to top
Andy G
at 18:14 on 2009-12-16While we are being coarse ... weren't the broomsticks phallic in this film? I don't think entirely unintentionally - it was all part of the cocky oneupmanship and posturing going on during the quidditch, which felt quite authentically testosterone-driven.
@ Dan: I've never wondered about this before, but looking at our comments, I wonder if there is a difference between undertones and overtones? They seem to mean basically the same thing yet surely semantically they should be opposites ...
permalink
-
go to top
Dan H
at 18:22 on 2009-12-16Hmm ... I think maybe overtones are more overt, undertones more subtle and more likely to be accidental? I'm not sure. Sort of overtones shape and frame something, while undertones underly and support it.
I'm not sure...
permalink
-
go to top
Arthur B
at 18:41 on 2009-12-16Overtones are the ones that hang down from the ceiling of the cave, undertones are the ones that grow up out of the ground.
permalink
-
go to top
Rami
at 19:00 on 2009-12-16According to the intertubes, overtones were originally just the higher pitches you could perceive but not hear in a piece of music; undertones where the analogous lower pitches. I never knew that, but it makes so much sense...
permalink
-
go to top
Andy G
at 19:37 on 2009-12-16I'm in philosophy mode - how can you perceive a sound without hearing it?
permalink
-
go to top
Andy G
at 19:37 on 2009-12-16I would like to apologise for digressing.
permalink
-
go to top
Sister Magpie
at 20:15 on 2009-12-16
I'm in philosophy mode - how can you perceive a sound without hearing it?
Just guessing, but maybe it means that the music would sound different to you without the tones, but you can't hear the tones themselves. So you are perceiving their presence, you just can't hear them.
permalink
-
go to top
Rami
at 20:54 on 2009-12-16
it means that the music would sound different to you without the tones, but you can't hear the tones themselves
There's also been
some research
around the idea that not-consciously-audible sounds can have interesting effects :-)
permalink
-
go to top
Andy G
at 23:47 on 2009-12-16Ahh but is that *perception* I ask with my annoyingly pedantic/facetious philosophy hat on ;)
I considered the possibility of something like a background hum that you don't notice until it's gone. Which would be essentially a reworking of what Sister Magpie said.
Sartre said something similar about self-consciousness - your consciousness can't be directly conscious of itself because of circularity, but it is always aware of itself like a background hum.
Ahem. So, Harry Potter ...
permalink
-
go to top
Guy
at 14:58 on 2009-12-17Wow, Neville is hot stuff!
How to perceive a sound without hearing it? If the soundwaves were inaudible to you (wearing earplugs, say) but caused a visible perturbation in some kind of sensitive material (like a string that had a resonant frequency, say) then you would be perceiving the sound with your eyes, but not hearing it. There's a book by Norman Doidge called "The Brain the Changes Itself" and one of the most fascinating things in it, to me, was about how people can, when equipped with the right... equipment, learn to "see" with their tongue.
I don't know why or if it's the "proper" interpretation, but I tend to think of overtones as being like, subtle allusions or things that remind you of other things (as in, "this film had overtones of Hitchcock") whereas undertones are kind of, I don't know, more abstract somehow, or to do with how something makes you feel (eg, "Peter's apparent munificence carried an unmistakable undertone of menace".) I guess in media outside music, "tone" is always going to be a kind of metaphor that doesn't quite perfectly map to the subject matter, although obviously the term is widely used because it's good at describing *something*...
permalink
-
go to top
http://mary-j-59.livejournal.com/
at 16:18 on 2009-12-17Wow, Dan! I swore that I would not spend another penny on the Harry Potter franchise, but you make me almost want to see this movie. Almost. But (although I think there is some "film corruption" in the later books) I do disagree with you about one thing. I think, if the later films are more watchable than the books are readable, that isn't just because the kids are no longer twelve. It's because the scriptwriters have deliberately *changed their characters* to make them nicer and more mature than they are in the books. Harry's flirting with the waitress would certainly be one example; my livejournal friend, Terri-testing, has an essay in which she details several more. Basically, what it comes down to is that Harry's dark side is expunged, while Snape's is made more prominent. We don't see Harry merrily bullying random strangers, for one thing. This change started already in OOTP (the film), where Harry hands the prophecy bauble to Lucius in order to spare Neville torture. Not in the book! It's interesting (as Terri says) that the screenwriters make these changes in order to make Harry and co. more heroic. Had we seen onscreen what they actually do in the books, I think it would be glaringly obvious that Harry, in particular, is not a very nice kid.
permalink
-
go to top
http://mary-j-59.livejournal.com/
at 16:22 on 2009-12-17Oh - if you're interested, here is the link to Terri's essay:
http://terri-testing.livejournal.com/21351.html
permalink
-
go to top
Sister Magpie
at 17:52 on 2009-12-17
This change started already in OOTP (the film), where Harry hands the prophecy bauble to Lucius in order to spare Neville torture. Not in the book!
Oh, I think it happened before that. As I understand it, PoA "fixed" the scene where Draco gets slashed by Buckbeak in PoA as well. Probably because if you filmed that scene exactly as written it would be harder to take Hagrid and Buckbeak as innocent victim to the Malfoy pet murderers. As I remember hearing it, what Draco actually does in the book is given to Hagrid, while Draco behaves far more aggressively and provokingly.
Sorry, that's just always been something that's bothered me about PoA. That storyline just always seems like a real example of the narrative's stinginess of compassion that we get to laugh when the animal attacks the kid for the same reason Harry wants to attack him (he's annoying) and then play the soft-hearted victim about it. It's like something written by the Prioress in the Canterbury Tales.
permalink
-
go to top
Frank
at 18:14 on 2009-12-17
Had we seen onscreen what they actually do in the books, I think it would be glaringly obvious that Harry, in particular, is not a very nice kid.
Harry has nothing on Hermione. That girl's overtones are disquieting in their dissonance.
permalink
-
go to top
http://mary-j-59.livejournal.com/
at 04:25 on 2009-12-18Oh, yes. There was some debate on deathtocapslock about who would become the next Dark Lord, and many people pointed to Hermione. It's certainly either Hermione or Harry, and I'd agree Hermione is more the type - cleverer and more ambitious, and she really treats Ron quite badly. If he did to her what she does to him, we'd find him abusive. She is definitely disturbing - and she used to be an insecure, aggressive, but basically likable little girl!
But Harry is presented as a CHRIST FIGURE! Harry, the unrepentant torturer. Harry, who never has to change his mind or apologize for anything. That really bugs me, because I take Christ figures seriously. The symbolism means something to me, and to see it so misused was just offensive.
Getting off track, though. The main point is that, by the end of DH, these are not nice kids. Ron is the best of the trio, certainly, but even he has obvious flaws; I find both Harry and Hermione disturbing. In the movies, their actions are sanitized and even twisted to make them conform to standard morality. And that's one reason the movies may work better than the books.
permalink
-
go to top
http://orionsnebula.blogspot.com/
at 22:41 on 2009-12-18Stepping in to crow about having figured out how to use OpenID. My emailed request for a username is now redundant.
I LOVE deathtocapslock, by the way, thank you so much for introducing me to it. That site, and all of the HP discussion on here, will be enormously helpful to my Slytherin!Harry fic.
permalink
-
go to top
Melissa G.
at 22:56 on 2009-12-18Adding to the Ron/Hermione books vs. movies discussion, I was watching OotP movie other day, and I found the bantering between Ron and Hermione quite cute and sweet and definitely not as filled with malice as it appears in the books. In the books, it really seems like they have nothing in common outside Harry to the extent that you wonder what they talk about when he's not around. I remember in the OotP movie a cute little moment when Ron is badgering Hermione to help him with an essay, and she tells him she'll do the intro and that's it while wearing a little smile on her face. It was much more like she knew he could write it but she was willing to give him a little push in the right direction to help him out. Which doesn't seem to the be the way the books portray her doing their homework for them (Harry and Ron) all the time....
permalink
-
go to top
http://musingsandscribblings.blogspot.com/
at 20:58 on 2009-12-20Great review. I haven't watched any of the movies since Goblet of Fire and the latter books made me less inclined. But your review gives me some hope for the movie series over the book series.
I'm glad they didn't tar and feather Slughorn. He was one of my favorite characters.
permalink
-
go to top
http://marionros.livejournal.com/
at 12:55 on 2009-12-22Those bloody movies very subtly whitewash the nastiness that is the books.
http://terri-testing.livejournal.com/21351.html#cutid1
A few examples: during Occlumency lessons, the books show Snape complimenting Harry when he succesfully repels him from his mind and glimpses scenes from Snape's mind about Snape's rotten childhood. Snape has to leave, which gives Harry the opportunity to sneak into his teacher's private Pensieve memories. When Snape discovers this tresspass, he throws the lil' bastid out.
In the movie, Snape throws Harry out when he succesfully repells Snape and sees his childhood memories.
BookHarry uses the Halfblood Prince's spells to bully and hex children he doesn't like and the unpopular Squib caretaker from behind. Not so in the movie.
BookHarry hides the book after slicing Draco into hospital because he wants to keep on using it and its containing hexes. In the movie, he feels anxious about the book and asks Ginny to hide it from him so he wouldn't be tempted by it.
The movie clearly wants to make us believe that it is the book and its author that is evil, and not pure-as-fallen-snow Harry while in the books it is Harry himself who misuses the spells and hints to cheat and bully, and it is made clear by the author (JKR) that Harry is justified to do so!
I know that I should feel relieved that the scriptwriters and producers of the movies at least recognise that the original Harry Potter is an evil little turd and the author of the books quite mad, but at the same time I'm furious that the malignent narcissistic psychobitch gets even richer than she already is by allowing her twaddle to be filmed.
Grrr....
permalink
-
go to top
http://nykinora.livejournal.com/
at 13:54 on 2009-12-22Hmmm. The whole 'who-is-the-worst-of-the-trio' debate. They ALL suck imo. That said, I *never* bought into the argument that Ron being the most 'normal' or (gag) 'relatable' of the three kids (i.e. a so-called 'typical teenage boy etc.) made him a beter, more interesting, sympathetic or compelling character.
Yeah sure, Harry is an utter tool, nasty and a cipher in every respect but Ron, to me, is plain tiresome while his (un)'relationship' with Hermione was manipulative on both ends, boring to read about and stank of mutual abuse and disrespect on both sides.
I took an initial dislike to Ron the instant I encountered the character and there was little that he did throughout the series that dispelled my initial impression that he was greedy, lazy, thoughtless, smug (when he wasn't wildly insecure) and complacent as hell. While Hermione can be annoying and patronising about the Wizarding world, at least she thinks to actually ask some damned questions. Ron, however, swallows everything he's ever been told from birth - and *never* progresses beyond that default position.
I always read the character as a toady. He was an envious, covetous, mean-spirited little jerk who simultaneously worshipped yet resented Harry (as if Harry, of all people, needed a cult) and spent most of his time competing with Hermione for the position of Harry's right-hand man. Not to mention he takes out his mediocrity complex on the 'lesser' Hermione - since he wouldn't dare do it with Harry, save for the brief falling out in Book 4.
He struck me as one of those slimy, dangerous guys who is always looking out for someone who is worse off or lower than him in the social pecking simply to feel better about himself, while resenting anyone who he perceives to be better than him. (Hence his continual disdain for Neville who is more his own person than Ron could ever hope to be. He's every bit as much of a physical buffoon as Neville - minus the sensitivity or the brains - yet somehow he imagines he's superior?)
As for Ron and gender politics? Nothing cute or funny about him in that respect and he's downright creepy at times in the way that he treats Lavender, Ginny and Hermione.
Harry's hollow blandness started to bug by book 3 (he's so redundant, coddled and uninteresting), whereas Hermione's slavish devotion to two guys who routinely use her for homework was always of concern along with the misguided liberalism, prissiness and vengeful streak. (She's pretty much a proxy for JKs own self-hatred anyway.) Still, the plot couldn't function without her whereas Ron was always a needless adjunct.
However, by the time she's crying hysterically, attacking Ron with canaries, being a moral hypocrite oh - and washing Ron's socks, I had ceased to care about the character even if she at one point was the only one with a functioning brain cell and tad of wit. (And the way I see it, nominating Hermione as a candidate for future Dark Lord? Is an unintentional compliment to the character, especially once you see what the 'good' guys are like...)
If the movie tackles what I have seen as one of the central problems of the Potter series then that's good. I am completely with Dan. HP is supposed bildungsroman yet nobody ever grows the hell up - as the god-awful epilogue alone can attest to - and where the characters are superficially put through the motions of adolescence then adulthood minus any of the emotions or even physical sensations that accompany it. JK criticises Blyton, but at least Blyton wasn't stupid enough to mistake lashings of '(faux) dark content' with a mature premise or storyline, or think that it equated to the automatic maturation of her characters.
JK's problem was that she wanted it both ways, as usual. She wanted the sugary, uncomplex school story and all of its attendant values fixed firmly in place yet simultaneously wanted the accolades attached to being A Serious Adult Writer with all of the decorative trappings of 'heavy themes' (Nazis, WWII, class, race, discrimination etc. in an attempt to provide depth and scope) What we got instead, was a nonsensical mess as it failed on both fronts in the end and managed to be neither.
(Even when she tries to move beyond the setting of Hogwarts in the last book and plot structurally collapses, the spirit of Hogwarts still instructs the text and the characters' actions. The books never stop being a moral school story.)
Anyway... *Even* if the film is an improvement on the steaming pile of poo of HBP - it still sounds like a case of someone cleaning JK's crap up and retrospectively providing the much-needed editing that the the books should have had in the first place...
permalink
-
go to top
http://katsullivan.insanejournal.com/
at 15:05 on 2009-12-22
BookHarry hides the book after slicing Draco into hospital because he wants to keep on using it and its containing hexes. In the movie, he feels anxious about the book and asks Ginny to hide it from him so he wouldn't be tempted by it.
Wow! Now that would have been a story worth reading. I think it tells a lot about their opinion of the original source material that the film writers have to change so much about the story for it to work.
JK criticises Blyton, but at least Blyton wasn't stupid enough to mistake lashings of '(faux) dark content' with a mature premise or storyline, or think that it equated to the automatic maturation of her characters.
I'm in the minority in thinking that Blyton's characters actually grow up a tremendous lot for children's book characters. Darrel Rivers gets a grip on a temper that is never depicted as a good thing (unlike say, any one of the seven Weasleys). June, Alicia's bratty sneak of a cousin, becomes somebody admirable when the girl who was mentoring her for a bet breaks her leg in the last book and June, who had quit a few chapters earlier, returns to court for both the broken-leg mentor and her own self-dignity. I don't know of any HP character that you can read up in Book 7 that is in anyway different from the person you met in Book 1. But maybe that is the point Rowling was after with, "your choices show who you are".
permalink
-
go to top
http://quimtessence.livejournal.com/
at 04:34 on 2009-12-25Initially, I had written a rather extensive comment/rant, but I think you've covered pretty well most of the things I was going to say, in one way or another.
Instead, I think my rant could be boiled down to: This movie version of HBP sounds similar to what I expected the book to be like. The real book. The one that millions of people queued up to buy the second it came out and which took her years to put together/write.
That's.. kind of sad. I'm actually siding with a major Hollywood movie that, although it features brilliant actors, I never thought myself siding with.
permalink
-
go to top
Robinson L
at 00:02 on 2010-01-20Interesting analysis, Dan. (You know, I should just devise a program to add that phrase automatically to the beginning of every article of yours I respond to. With a drop down box for the first word with the “great” and “interesting” as options.)
But for me ... no. Not at all. The movie had its good points, I'll grant, and it may have put a better spin on certain aspects of the original, tweaked some details, that sort of thing. But all-in-all, it was just the same idiot plot with the same idiot characters 'far as I could see. Might've been improvements around the edges, but the the story they were working off of sucked to the core, and the movie completely failed to overcome that, in my opinion.
I suppose there was more to the Harry/Ginny romance in this movie than in the books. On the other hand, Ptolemaeus has always been a Harry/Hermione shipper, even now that she hates the series. Consequently, that pairing has always been on my radar, and while watching
Half-Blood Prince
it occurred to me that—in movie canon, anyway—she really does have a point. I'm not a shipper (if anything, I was rooting for Harry to blow off the whole wizarding world and go out with the Muggle waitress) but even I saw that he and Hermione went very well together, in this movie, anyways.
Now as for that Christmas sequence at the Burrow. I had high hopes for that scene when I first saw it, but realistically I expected it to bomb and in that respect, I was not disappointed. Sure, it starts out good, until you discover that instead of coming to the Burrow to do something truly mad like, I don't know, kill, kidnap, or otherwise harm Harry, Ginny, or anyone, really, Bellatrix and Greyback only came to play a bit of hide-and-seek with them and indulge in a spot of arson, which couldn't really have any impact on account of never being mentioned again. I mean, seriously, what were they hoping to accomplish there, scare Harry to death?
I think it was – actually embarrassingly I've forgotten his name, Mike Smith I think, the guy who did the Half-Blood Prince review who observed that one of his major problems with the Potter series was that it was impossible to take all of the Dark Serious Themes seriously, because they were presented side-by-side with things like Sneakoskopes and Puking Pastilles.
That's right, Mike Smith. And I do think he was the one who made that point.
I had a problem with the sequence where the Death Eaters come back from killing Dumbledore, too—similar to my problem with the scene at the Burrow. For me, the image of destruction was
not
remarkably effective because I was sitting there thinking, 'seriously? That's all you're going to do?' Now if they'd been blasting students and teachers left and right, or at least making a concerted effort to do some real
damage
that would've been one thing. As it was, both sequences came off as displays of childish high spirits, which, when it comes to behavior suitable for the top lieutenants of the Dark Lord, is several steps above getting-your-arses-handed-to-you-by-a-bunch-of-teenagers, but is still something which I'd think rather beneath them. I can't see the CIA jumping out of trees at Fidel Castro going “Boo!” or trashing his house in a fit of pique. (Methodically searching his house, maybe, but not trashing it.)
The first seems to be there purely to explain where the book got its title, the second seems to be there to highlight how little Harry truly understands about his world.
Funny, I took it the former way both times, but with it making even less sense in the movie because the whole Half-Blood Prince thing factored in even less.
@ Shimmin: Personally, I wouldn't use Doctor Who as an example, because while it's got childish and silly down pretty well, I generally find its attempts to be Mature and Serious—well, childish and silly. And not in a good way. More in a “I'm J K Rowling and what I'm writing is Big and Meaningful, you got that?” way.
permalink
-
go to top
http://mmmarcusz.livejournal.com/
at 02:32 on 2010-04-28
The key to defeating Voldemort is knowledge and control. Slughorn has knowledge, and Dumbledore needs it. Dumbledore uses Harry to get at Slughorn's memory. Slughorn uses his students to validate himself, but Slughorn's students – both Harry and Voldemort - use him for their own purposes. Voldemort uses Draco to get at Dumbledore, and Dumbledore uses Snape to protect Draco and Harry. It's wheels within wheels on a scale Rowling never allowed us to imagine, because she would never allow us to interpret Dumbledore as being genuinely manipulative.
I'm reminded of one of my favourite posts on the "Deathtocapslock" forum - McLaggen expects Harry to favour him because they're both Slughorn's favourites - Harry tells him to become one of Dumbledore's favourite's, then they'll talk! The morality of Dumbledore's establishing an extra-governmental armed group (with tentacles in all offices of the Ministry of Magic) is never questioned, because he is a Good Guy.
permalink
-
go to top
Arthur B
at 09:00 on 2010-04-28I'm sure I've said this at least three times before, but it still astounds me that Rowling thinks that the Potter series encourages kids to think for themselves and question authority, when over the entire series Harry basically trusts a major authority figure in his life (and this trust turns out to be entirely justified). The real lesson is "question authority, unless it looks kind and gives you sweets and dislikes the same people you dislike - then you should obey."
permalink
-
go to top
Dan H
at 14:59 on 2010-04-29To be fair, this is a relatively common type of lazy thinking. See jokes passim ad nauseam about [SUBCULTURE X] rebelling against conformity in manner which seems uniform to outsiders.
permalink
-
go to top
Sister Magpie
at 17:17 on 2010-04-29
To be fair, this is a relatively common type of lazy thinking. See jokes passim ad nauseam about [SUBCULTURE X] rebelling against conformity in manner which seems uniform to outsiders.
I agree. The idea basically is that Dumbledore doesn't listen to the official authority, so following Dumbledore's authority is thinking for yourself.
I'm more disturbed by the lazy thinking in other places that mirrors that kind of thing. Like how it imo encourages double standards for behavior rather than really thinking about the morality of different situations. Or most of all for me the laziness of the "plea for tolerance" set up that's more like a big pat on the back for anyone who doesn't consider him/herself a racist. (Which is pretty much everyone.)
permalink
-
go to top
Viorica
at 21:22 on 2010-04-29
To be fair, this is a relatively common type of lazy thinking. See jokes passim ad nauseam about [SUBCULTURE X] rebelling against conformity in manner which seems uniform to outsiders.
Most people go through that phase. When I was fourteen, I refused to wear anything resembling fashionable because people who dressed fashionable = people who were nasty to me at school = TEH EVOL. (On the other hand, wearing stuff that was definitely
un
fashionable was the antithesis of that they would do, and was therefore Good.) Of course, most people grow out of that by the time they're sixteen or so.
permalink
-
go to top
Frank
at 04:55 on 2010-04-30
Or most of all for me the laziness of the "plea for tolerance" set up that's more like a big pat on the back for anyone who doesn't consider him/herself a racist.
...even though they are towards Muggles.
Not the lynching, white conservative type of racism, more like the disregarding, white liberal kind. imo
permalink
-
go to top
Sister Magpie
at 16:00 on 2010-04-30
...even though they are towards Muggles.
Not the lynching, white conservative type of racism, more like the disregarding, white liberal kind. imo
And pretty much everyone else as well as Muggles. The whole "we're not bigots" mostly rests completely on whether or not you consider Muggleborns just as good as everyone else as wizards. (And also whether you accept as wizards people with embarassing ties to other groups who pass as wizards.)
permalink
-
go to top
Orion
at 02:52 on 2015-07-06Apologies for the extreme necro, but this made me smile: I can't see the CIA jumping out of trees at Fidel Castro going “Boo!” or trashing his house in a fit of pique. Because it sounds like the words of someone who doesn't know the CIA very well. These are the guys behind plans like "drive domestic left-wing activists to madness by letting air out their tires while they sleep." (Unless I misremember and that was the cops) There's really nothing too silly to imagine the CIA doing it.
permalink
-
go to top
Robinson L
at 20:36 on 2015-07-06Ha, good point, Orion; I may have overestimated the CIA's level of professionalism.
On the other hand, I feel like, as evil organizations devoted to imposing their own despotic will upon the world go, the CIA has enough street credit that they can get away with quite a bit of silliness alongside it. The Death Eaters, not so much.
permalink
-
go to top
http://kitsune9tailed.livejournal.com/
at 06:56 on 2015-07-28I was with you up until here:
"One gets the impression that Rowling who – if I may make an impertinent assumption – does not give the impression of having been an especially bright spark at school"
This was just a petty jab at someone and crossed the line from criticizing someone's work to a direct personal, and shameful insult. I am sorry that you felt your criticism of the series (which, although I disagree with it, I was fascinated to read and try to understand the points) was so weak that it had to have an extra little punch by calling someone stupid or uneducated simply because you disagree with their body of work.
So, shame on you and I sincerely hope you grow to be a better person than this.
permalink
-
go to top
In order to post comments, you need to
log in to Ferretbrain
or
authenticate with OpenID
. Don't have an account? See the
About Us
page for more details.
Show / Hide Comments -- More in December 2009
2 notes
·
View notes