(no subject)

[learnedax]

Well, this one didn't suck as much as the first one. The big problem with this series is that they are really intended for people who have read the books and want to see them visualized. Since they are specifically aimed at children, there might be some degree of dumbing down, although this is not really necessary since droves children already love the books as they are.

Starting from that target audience, the filmmakers have undertaken to stick in as many Stunning Visuals and Magical Moments as possible, glorifying special effects to the detriment of plot. The second movie thankfully does rather less of that on the whole, and the special effects are by and large used well as part of the plot. Unfortunately, they are about all that is used well for the plot. There are fundamental differences between page and screen that necessitate conveying the same information in different ways, a picture being worth a thousand words, etc. The filmmakers don't care. Because they know their target audience wants each individual scene that they see to be Just So, they do a truly poor job of making the film as a whole have the balance and introspection that the book does. Instead, they film as much of the book as they can scene-for-scene, line-for-line, cutting parts they can't fit, and effectively ignoring the visual nature of their medium. Case in point: Harry and Ron have a tense scene running into Percy while disguised as Crabb and Goyle. This scene exists in the book solely to hint at a love plot for Percy later in the story. But in the movie, they've cut Percy's love plot entirely, making this scene a total waste. This is simply sloppy planning. Instead of intricate humanist plots, we get extended action sequences.

One other thing about book II in particular occurred to me while watching the film, which kind of bugs me: the big monster is not, in fact, a basilisk. Although it's understandable to ignore the whole chicken-dragon aspect, in mythologies where the basilisk can petrify, it is by direct gaze or mirror, and it will petrify itself if it sees its own reflection. So why go to all the trouble of not having its victims see it directly? It still has deadly contact poison, so the threat of death is not really lessened, and a contrived layer of complexity could be removed.

Comments

[metahacker.livejournal.com]

glick...what a reference. Basilisks and Cockatrices are *not* the same thing...everyone knows basilisks have eight legs and are huge, whereas cockatrices are the lizard-chickens the size of, well, chickens.

Of course, neither resemble the snakey-thingy in the movie...and their roc was a wee bit on the tiny size, IMHO.

I found this movie to be a lot jumpier than the first one, more stuff crammed in just to get to it, with less flow. Too much stuff came up and never was significant; squid on the mantlepiece of high order.

TMH

Basalisk

[its-just-me.livejournal.com]

Pardon my sketchy memory - Basilisk - Hatched from the egg of a male cocktrice which is then sat on by a lizard? There for Basisk is almost all lizard.

Re: Basilisk

[its-just-me.livejournal.com]

I just checked your occult listing. That is the first time i have seen Basilisk and Cocotrice noted as the same animal. Not to discredit it, since mythos often have variations, but the version I am most familiar with for hatching a cocktrice is the way described in your listing, and to hatch a Basilisk is the same method of a Cockatrice egg sat on by lizard thingys, but a Basilisk would be the only offspring a Cockatrice could produce. No recollection of what Basilisks produce. I really should find something to back all this up.

[tpau]

um wht roc? they had a phoenix...

[learnedax.livejournal.com]

well... whether basilisks are actually more lizardy or snakey, and their number of legs, is variable according to source. the cockatrice is occasionally considered to be the same, which is why i overlooked it, because i wanted a quick reference with general info and a picture. shrug.

i'd agree that this film appears somewhat choppier in some ways, mainly because they left out whole plots. they did that because the books keep getting longer, but they feel the need to keep the movies under 3 hours