You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Friends In Your Head | Forums → Episodes → The 200th Episode 24-Hour Harry Potter Commentary Marathon
It's hard for me to list mine as I've only seen/read each once and not really thought about ranking or anything. This seems sensible though.
1. Prisoner of Azkaban
2. Deathy Hallows
3. Philosophers Stone
4. Chamber of Secrets
5. Half-Blood Prince
6. Goblet of Fire
7. Order of the Phoenix
EDIT: Reshuffled my choices during the livestream.
Last edited by Owen_Ward (2013-12-08 07:43:34)
Having not read a single page of it, my votes go directly to the films, disregarding anything they might've left out from the books.
1. Prisoner of Azkaban
2. Half Blood Prince
3. Deathly Hallows A
4. Deathly Hallows B
5. Philosopher's stone
6. Order of the Phoenix
7. Goblet of Fire
8. Chamber of Secrets
Just finished Goblet in my pre-marathon re-read of the whole series. I had completely forgotten Ludo Bagman existed. Now all I can think of is that he should've been in the film and played by Stephen Fry.
I don't get the love the Half Blood Prince and not-love for Order Of The Phoenix
I don't get the love the Half Blood Prince and not-love for Order Of The Phoenix
If you're referring to the books, I totally agree; OOTP is my second-favorite. The film, though, is pretty bloody awful. Umbridge's casting was perfection, but otherwise...
Rewatching Half-Blood Prince right now. Wow is it great. Perfectly mixes comedy and horror. It's much better than I remember.
I remember feeling like they kinda botched Dumbledore's end scene. Otherwise, it's fine. I was never a huge fan of that book though, you really feel the "middle-chapterness" of it as its just setting up all this stuff for the finale.
As for Deathly Hallows Pt. 1, I'm genuinely surprised that people seem to love that one. I have to wonder if it's just the fact that it stays super faithful to the book, because to me, it does not really work if you're not bringing your knowledge of the books in with you. Dobby's death scene in particular feels woefully unearned, as he's had like 15 minutes of screen-time 5 movies ago, and then another 10 in this one, and suddenly we're supposed to feel like this is some huge moment. If you pretend the books don't exist, I don't think it works as a fulfilling narrative (unlike other "part 1" adaptations like Fellowship of the Rings for example).
Part 2 may deviate in ways fans hate, but it's at least enjoyable as a magic-themed extended action movie. But I admit to being odd man out on this one. I was never a fan of how that book handled the final duel (with Harry winning on basically a technicality), and I much prefer just having a full on magic battle between the two of them. That movie does lose major points for not showing how several major side characters bite it, I don't know what the hell they were thinking there.
If you're referring to the books, I totally agree; OOTP is my second-favorite. The film, though, is pretty bloody awful. Umbridge's casting was perfection, but otherwise...
I've read all the books and 3 and 5 are the only films I'd say are actually good rather than alright. Make of that what you will.
Half Blood Prince always felt like there was a lot of padding before the big finish, we have another school year, another round of whats up with snape? Let's do it all again so we can reveal the Horcruxes at the last minute
Also I'm rather bothered by the scene where Hermione creates some birds to dive bomb Ron that just vanish once they hit the door. Thats animal cruelty of the worst kind! She's creating life only to destroy it! Star Trek episodes have philosophized over less!
As for Deathly Hallows Pt. 1, I'm genuinely surprised that people seem to love that one. I have to wonder if it's just the fact that it stays super faithful to the book, because to me, it does not really work if you're not bringing your knowledge of the books in with you. Dobby's death scene in particular feels woefully unearned, as he's had like 15 minutes of screen-time 5 movies ago, and then another 10 in this one, and suddenly we're supposed to feel like this is some huge moment. If you pretend the books don't exist, I don't think it works as a fulfilling narrative (unlike other "part 1" adaptations like Fellowship of the Rings for example).
Oh shit that was in part 1, wan't it? For some reason my brain decided to lump that in with part 2, but yes, the whole Dobby thing is one of my major points for why the entire film series fails at being movies instead of "Harry Potter, the visual companion".
Well... Okay then, I'm trying really hard to find something redeeming to say about about the movies right now, so I'm not that guy....but I got nothing. Nothing.
As for Deathly Hallows Pt. 1, I'm genuinely surprised that people seem to love that one. I have to wonder if it's just the fact that it stays super faithful to the book, because to me, it does not really work if you're not bringing your knowledge of the books in with you.
Nah, I really like it but have never read the book 
Last edited by Jimmy B (2013-11-29 10:38:52)
Just one more week, you guys.
+2
I should probably get around to watching the last movie.
I think the excuse they come up with early on (during the Dueling Club stuff in Chamber) is something to the effect of, "Look, when you're in a battle for your life, it's easier to do a quick disarming spell than something really cool and inventive."
Last edited by Doctor Submarine (2013-12-01 03:15:27)
That episode of Alohomora with Teague and Dorkman was great. To the Transfiguration stuff, I'll add that Sorcerer's Stone contains a passage about McGonagall having the students turn a mouse into a snuffbox as part of a test. I find it existentially terrifying that you could be turned into an inanimate object.
I think the excuse they come up with early on (during the Dueling Club stuff in Chamber) is something to the effect of, "Look, when you're in a battle for your life, it's easier to do a quick disarming spell than something really cool and inventive."
Yep, that's why I watch movies about wizards, JK Rowling: realism.
I'm no fan of the excesses of Jason Statham movies, but there's a wide middle ground, I think.
Last edited by Zarban (2013-12-01 04:54:06)
Doctor Submarine wrote:I think the excuse they come up with early on (during the Dueling Club stuff in Chamber) is something to the effect of, "Look, when you're in a battle for your life, it's easier to do a quick disarming spell than something really cool and inventive."
Yep, that's why I watch movies about wizards: realism.
Fair point, but the series has to have its own internal logical consistency. Also, there are eight of these movies, and there's only so many strange and original spells to come up with. Half the spells they use in the books are some variation on "knock my enemy backwards."
Yep, that's why I watch movies about wizards, JK Rowling: realism.
No no, the blame is squarely on Yates' shoulder for how he chose to visualize the battles.
Fair point, but the series has to have its own internal logical consistency. Also, there are eight of these movies, and there's only so many strange and original spells to come up with.
Kinda like saying "there's only so many ways to throw a punch." As a kung fu movie aficionado, I can assure you the only limit to throwing punches in a choreographed fight scene is the imagination of the choreographers.
And now imagine instead of punches it's DOING LITERALLY ANYTHING YOU CAN IMAGINE BECAUSE MAGIC.
Half the spells they use in the books are some variation on "knock my enemy backwards."
Snape vs. McGonagall, from the book:
Professor McGonagall moved faster than Harry could have believed: Her wand slashed through the air and for a split second Harry thought that Snape must crumple, unconscious, but the swiftness of his Shield Charm was such that McGonagall was thrown off balance. She brandished her wand at a torch on the wall and it flew out of its bracket: Harry, about to curse Snape, was forced to pull Luna out of the way of the descending flames, which became a ring of fire that filled the corridor and flew like a lasso at Snape --
Then it was no longer fire, but a great black serpent that McGonagall blasted to smoke, which re-formed and solidified in seconds to become a swarm of pursuing daggers: Snape avoided them only by forcing the suit of armor in front of him, and with echoing clangs the daggers sank, one after another, into its breast...
Flitwick's spell hit the suit of armor behind which Snape had taken shelter: With a clatter it came to life. Snape struggled free of the crushing arms and sent it flying back toward his attackers: Harry and Luna had to dive sideways to avoid it as it smashed into the wall and shattered. When Harry looked up again, Snape was in full flight, McGonagall, Flitwick, and Sprout all thundering after him: He hurtled through a classroom door, and moments later, he heard McGonagall cry, "Coward! COWARD!"
Snape vs. McGonagall, from the movie:
[standing almost completely stationary] BANG. BANG. BANG. BANG. BANG. BANG. WOOSH.
MCGONAGALL
(whispering)
coward
+3
Meh. I don't hate the movie magic for what it is, but I've seen them so many times that I forget how much cooler the books are when it comes to magic.
I'm kinda with DocSub on this one. It shifts to the more direct "gunfight" style spells, because otherwise, the whole notion of wizards being more powerful than muggles kinda breaks down. Like, if Voldemort has to do some fancy spell to get my car to turn into a monster to chase me down and eat me, while he's busy doing that I can pull out a gun and shoot him in the face.
I think they could've (and should've) used splashes of more inventive magic throughout the movies, but fundamentally I don't have a problem with the laser-gun style approach to the battles.
. Like, if Voldemort has to do some fancy spell to get my car to turn into a monster to chase me down and eat me, while he's busy doing that I can pull out a gun and shoot him in the face.
Except any wizard worth his salt will have cast 6 defense spells before you even pull the gun, so any muggle projectile/anything really, can't even get near them while they're doing their fancy charms. Read that Quote that Dorkman posted again. Those aren't super complicated spells that take a lot of time to conjure. Those are split second flicks of the wrist performed by really really damn good wizards/witches. That's something I think a lot of people miss. Most of the magic we see in the first 5/6 books is beginner level, performed by students who barely even have a grasp of the fundamentals. They're essentially doing magic longhand, I mean hell, for most of the series they aren't even doing anything non-vocally.
So when we see REAL wizards and witches in full battle mode, it's fast, it's intense, it's chaotic, it's messy, it's everything under the sun to try and kill that other person while the other person is doing everything under the sun to not get killed, or try to kill back, and it's daaaamn fast. It's supposed to be impressive, this is what real magic looks like in a real world fight.
There's a line in Deathly Hallows about the defense spells they cast around their campsites, something to the effect of having done them so often that even Ron could bbasically do it in his sleep. And there's one right after they escape the Wizard Cops I believe, where they are all panicked, and Hermione is just throwing up defensive spells in a panic and the way it reads it's like a minute and there's 16 different spells up. If I remember tomorrow, I'll try to find the exact quotes because I think it's really telling about how bad they are magic, really, and how much they still have to learn.
Right, but my point is, if you have a direct killing spell, there's no reason not to use that every time, as it's the most efficient way of taking down your opponent. So if you have wizards dueling to the death, ya, it's gonna be them really quickly firing short-burst killing spells at each other, and ya, it's gonna look like a laser-gun battle. All the creative magicky-type spells to get a bunch of vines to show up and incapacitate your opponent or whatever, end up being a waste of time.
Now, throwing logic aside, there's something to be said for a "fun" type of magic battle where it's constant wacky inventive things attacking the characters. This is something I'd imagine Spielberg could have a field day with in his prime. However, this requires a totally different tone, that doesn't fit with the later books/films in the series. The fun, lighthearted magic stuff fits in the first half of the series, but when shit gets dark and the movies are committed to their ultra-serious tone, having a suit of armor choking out professor snape is gonna seem WAY out of place.
Last edited by bullet3 (2013-12-01 10:44:09)
Just saw all of them for the first time - took me a week. You guys are gonna knock them over in a day. Redus Bullus.
Never read the books, so I didn't know what was going on with curses and motivations and backstory with Snape, Riddle, Lilly, Neville & the Prophecy, etc. Why did Dumbledore seem to want to die? Whose side was Snape on anyway FFS? No Luke, I am your father. Matrix Revolutions-like Limbo - also in a train station. The Locket horcrux was like the One Ring - gives you your period. Yes, duels were like shoot-outs. You could animate Uzis into their hands for the chasing scenes. Magic was a bit arbitrary - sometimes they could cure anything (time travel!) and other times they were impotent.
Great VFX. It seemed like every shot had CGI in it - of a very high quality. Always visually inventive. Love the tone for the 'dead-hour' of Deathly Hallows - part 1, they're in the blasted wilderness - outcast and directionless. It almost became The Road. Even Nick Cave shows up on the soundtrack. Didn't expect that.
Now for the extras.
Looking forward to the Marathon! Event of the year.
Are you guys doing the extended editions? Will there be a staggered release or all the mp3s up in one go?
Right, but my point is, if you have a direct killing spell, there's no reason not to use that every time, as it's the most efficient way of taking down your opponent. So if you have wizards dueling to the death, ya, it's gonna be them really quickly firing short-burst killing spells at each other, and ya, it's gonna look like a laser-gun battle.
I disagree entirely. There is, as we know only one, one-shot kill spell in the world of HP, THE killing curse as it is so aptly named, and it is such a piece of dark magic that only those fully immersed in the dark arts can A) Use it. B) Want to use it. So the one shot kill thing with magic is out (at least for anyone we would like to continue to respect). Obviously there are indirect ways of killing someone through magic. Which is where I would agrue a lot of the more inventive things we see in the fights start to come in. I would also say that in some ways a lot of what the fights in magic are is out witting your opponent into making a mistake (I don't know much about real fight choreo so Mike or Eddie could probably confirm/deny this, but I imagine there's a similar thing in real fighting) so that you can slip in between the cracks and take them out.
In the fight Mike posted:
"Professor McGonagall moved faster than Harry could have believed: Her wand slashed through the air and for a split second Harry thought that Snape must crumple, unconscious, but the swiftness of his Shield Charm was such that McGonagall was thrown off balance.
There we have, McGonagall attacked first with a swift attack (probably something similar to the one Dolohov used against Hermione in the Department of Minstries), a quick slash meant to take down your opponent quickly. but Snape quickly throws up a shield making it void.
She brandished her wand at a torch on the wall and it flew out of its bracket...
So she switches tactics, knowing any direct attack against Snape is just going to be thwarted with a shield charm. Distraction.
Then it was no longer fire, but a great black serpent that McGonagall blasted to smoke, which re-formed and solidified in seconds to become a swarm of pursuing daggers: Snape avoided them only by forcing the suit of armor in front of him, and with echoing clangs the daggers sank, one after another, into its breast...
First fire, then a snake, then flying daggers, all in the span of about 5 seconds. Chaos. Which one does he protect against? In the end the only reason he survives is a quick reflex.
Flitwick's spell hit the suit of armor behind which Snape had taken shelter: With a clatter it came to life. Snape struggled free of the crushing arms and sent it flying back toward his attackers
Another player has entered the game. Flitwick taking advantage of Snapes confusion and choice of hiding place, turns it against him. Restraining him. So Snape does the only thing he can and blows it apart across the room, most likely in some vain hope that it might do something similar to McGonagall or Flitwick giving him an opening.
When Harry looked up again, Snape was in full flight, McGonagall, Flitwick, and Sprout all thundering after him: He hurtled through a classroom door, and moments later, he heard McGonagall cry, "Coward! COWARD!"
And it works, the flying armour is enough to let him get out of the room.
Now you compare that to what you're saying.
blast
shield charm
blast
shield charm
blast
shield charm
blast
shield charm
blast
Fells like you and I are destined to do this forever.
Last edited by BigDamnArtist (2013-12-02 01:17:44)
Ok, you've convinced me. Well done.
+1
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 9 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
