Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Harry Potter
Options
-
12-11-2001 6:04pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Originally posted by ObeyGiant
Allow me to elaborate. I read it. I understood it. What I don't 'get' is what all the fuss is about. Apologies if this wasn't obvious.
i was being facitious.Originally posted by ObeyGiant
What?
What exactly are you trying to say here?
If you've got issues with people berating you because you're "jumping on the Harry Potter bandwagon" - please take them up with someone else. I have absolutely no problem with people reading the books for any reason, whether it's a result of the movie hype or not. Re-read my original post for evidence of such.
[/]
no, it was the point about harry potter only being released as a vehicle for merchandising. ie, the book of the film. i thought it was humourous. obviously im alone on that one. wel, we arent all as talented as me
I think the main problem with people not liking the Phantom Menace was that most people were children when the originals came out. Then they (predictably) grew up, and probably expected the Star Wars films to grow up with them. Perhaps people were expecting some sub-Tarantino bumpf? "Use the force, Mother****er!". I dunno - I personally dug TPM.It would come second if I was to list the Star Wars films in order of preference, so I can't even begin to make excuses for it.
hahahahahahaha! i like it!
use the force motherf*cker!
brilliant.
however, we all had different reasons for not liking this or that about TPM. personally i thought it was ruined by the likes of jar jar binks. the film wasnt menacing enough. i thihnk star wars was menacing. thats why i didnt like it anyway. well, not disliked, but let down. also, it was more a spot hte cameo film. would have prefered it like the oiginal, use all unknowns.As for LOTR - 3 books, 3 films. Where's the problem?
I don't know about you, but I personally can't sit through a film for more than 3 hours. And there was no way for any director to try and cram all three books into one film, and still remain "true" to the books. I doubt the fact these films are being released as a trilogy was some cynical marketing ploy, I propose this is simply simply the result of a director looking for the best way to realise his vision. I could be wrong, though.
again you are taking me at face value. try to read into what im saying a little bit. dig around. im trying to make you think a little bit. i dont want to have to write an essay on mhy i wrote something in the first place
and dont get all techy with me!Like I said - I only think it won it. Or maybe it came in after Ulysses. Can anyone clarify this?
i wasnt taking you at face value, im quiet sure it has never won any such award. apart from being critically acclaimed its not actually the wonderfully written. entertaining and fantastic yes, good writing no.
Originally posted by WhiteWashMan
the thread is about a film called harry potter ... i try to put to rest the talk of lotr because its a different film.
Let me refer you to the question in your post that prompted me to comment.
quote:
Originally posted by WhiteWashMan
why do you think its lotr?
Do you always try to 'put to rest' the talk of a subject by asking question about it? Odd tactic.
erm, someone else brought it up, i was merely refering to it.Please read over what I said. I kept my argument on-topic - The only references I made to LOTR were answering a question you had asked. The rest of my post was me listing the problems that I have with the Harry Potter movie. I suggest you take your own, bizarre advice - "if you cant stand to here someone make critisisms, then dont look or turn away". Just don't blame me for being off-topic.
the only problem with that is that i cant see where you said youd actually seen the film or not, and if you havent seen hte film, you cant really comment on it as such
which in itself is quiet amusing, as i havent either
i do have aproblem with someone turning around in a thread and saying something like,
well i thihk harry potter the film is a load of rubbish because..
a) i havent seen it.
b)i havent read the books
c) lotr is coming out and i think it should be much better because its older and its been worked on for a lot longer and its my favourite book of all time.
now, do you think i have a little bit of a valid point here. i mean i can argue all you want, but to be honest my only point among all of my padding was this.
i think the saying is, dont judge a book by its cover.
sure, entitled to an opinion, its just the wrong one...also, read back.. I dont belive I said anything bad about Harry Potter, not the books anyway. It simply pisses me off that such an obvious cash-in could subtract in anyway from a film like LOTR. My opinion could be changed when I see either film, but this is a webboard... its were poeple post there opinions on a given topic ffs.
oh and goodshape, if lotr is so good, it wont matter what is realeased a month in advance. it p1sses me off when people open their mouth and spew before they think. and i think its a just and noble cuase that all the money earned from lotr will be donated to charity. oh? its not? must be another marketing ploy eh?
but this is a webboard... its were poeple post there opinions on a given topic ffs.
amen brother. amen.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Originally posted by Goodshape
.........but HP was planned produced and rush-released primarily for two reasons:
1. X-Mas toys
2. coz LOTR was looking like a sure thing.
:rolleyes:
it was produced because they thought a film of the book would be a good idea and *shock* make some money.
it was rush released because films aimed at young children (and those of us adults who will go to see it) generally do better at this time of year, and there is no major box-office release out at the same time (and not because LOTR is out a month later. they probably chose that release time because there are no other big films out then).
toys and merchandising are inevitable these days with any childrens film or major blockbuster. duh! they want to make as much money as possible.0 -
I've been reading some stuff about the making of the HP movie, some good some bad...I havent checked the veracity of all these facts, but thought they may make for some interesting reading, and perhaps start a bit of intelligent discussion as opposed to the "I want my movie to be better than yours" rubbish that most of this thread has been proliferated with
1) Hollywood initially wanted to make Harry Potter as an animated movie, but Rowling refused them the rights.
2) Spielberg was rumoured to want to do the first three books as one movie, but this was also refused. (I'm skeptical of this one because of the next item). Another version of this is that Spielberg turned it down because of "fan expectations and artistic limitations"
3) Speilberg is interested in directing the thrid movie, as he reckons it is the best written and darkest of the first three
4) Rowling apparently only agreed to the current director (Chris Colombus) on the condition that she had some input into the style of the movie - she was concerned that his track record of movies such as Home Alone would result in the film not being "dark" enough.
5) There are persistent stories about the actors and actresses in the first movie getting relatively little pay by todays standards, causing the potential for problems in the second movie if the same cast is to be used
6) The excusive first-showing-on-TV rights for HP broke the previous record ($30m) set by Titanic. HP went for $70m. This is suppsedly where the "bigger than Titanic" comment from the producer originated.
7) The fourth book, The Goblet of Fire, may end up being produced as two movies due to the length of the book. Should this happen, it is also possible that they get released as little as 3 months apart (in 2004)
jc0 -
-
Advertisement
-
sometimes i wish i could put points accross as well as bonkey has done so.
...yea.... em, dont have much to say after that. Good points there likes..... but fudge it... i still want my movie to do better
...darn films gettin us all worked up.0
Advertisement