Hey There...

I think J.K. Rowling's a superb author and that all of the movies based of her books have lacked the same dynamics.

I agree the problem is they cant follow the books that would make them to long and they should have waited untill after the last book comes out because then they can know what needs to be in the movie.



[attachmentid=58]

Actually the directors work directly with JK in the movies so they always know what needs to be in the movies and what doesn't.
Although I have to agree with that the movies are not that good.

They leave out some of the parts that makes the books fun to read.

Same Here!

In the forum, "Platform Nine and Three Quarters...Order of the Phoenix,"
one thread starts with this:

I don't like the movies. I don't like anything about them. Unfortunately I take my frustration out on the poor, dumb, no-talent patsies they've wheeled in to say the lines (ie. Emma, Rupert and Dan).. don't get me started on the level of my pissed-off-ness where the movies are concerned. Oppps I think you did.
On your heads be it:
It's the directors' fault!! There's no great talent to represtenting a depth of emotion and characters accept that the director needs... well... a great talent. Why can't they get one! Where's Peter Jackson when you need him??? Get some quality artists and .. guess what?... you'll get quality art! Funny huh!?

What's with the choice of actors???? What.. people who can't act! Wow!! Brillant! Why didn't anyone else think of that?! Oh hang-on, I know the answer to this one: Because it's a REALLY bad idea!!! I mean look at the first movie for example, the guy who plays Oliver Wood shines. He's on the screen for 5minutes and he shines. He isn't amazing , it's just that he can act... opposed to every other kid. I can't believe that they had to settle on these awful child-stars when they had the world child population to draw from!!!
*breath, breath, lotus position, breath in the good, breath out the bad... sigh*

please note how sane I sounded when I started this post


psyduck: I don't know about a miniseries but I'm all for decent remakes.
I think the remakes should have a different actor to play Harry in every episode that way the movies won't be about the life and times of the actors and wll be about Harry Potter (kinda like this site should be! :P )

I never thought of that.
That's a way better way.

Who is Peter Jackson?

Haa...thats funny... Well I was kinda upset when I saw the movies...I mean they're awesome to watch and all but I feel that you dont get as much "feeling" from them as you do when you read the books. Well, thats just my opinion so dont go all Professor Snape on me....hes cool by the way

*Just read the piece about making a mini-series*

Oh, please no. . .My boyfriend was saying something about them capitalizing on it even more by making it into a cartoon/show like they did with Lilo and Stitch and so many other things. . .I think it cheapens it and it's really, incredibly lame. . .
Unless it's like, a mini-series like NBC did with "Merlin (Or was it King Arthur?)," because that was really neat.

*You just read WHAT piece about making a mini-series? Mine?
I wouldn't want them to make up any new stuff.
Just tell the story as-is.
In the HP movies made so far, they leave out a lot of important stuff, change things around and actually add stuff in a way that makes no sense at all.
If they were not stuck to a time limit, they could just tell the story without the crap.
Actually, "mini-series" is probably not the correct word.
It wouldn't be "mini" at all.
But it would be a "series."