Goblet of Fire: After

[bironic]

I cared about The Prisoner of Azkaban a lot (to state the obvious), and got angry with the movie for screwing it up. I didn't care much about The Goblet of Fire, and find myself, after two viewings in as many days, despite a few things that don't sit right, actually quite fond of the movie.

The opening was promising -- I expected them to skip to the Quidditch World Cup or at least to the Dursley Floo fiasco, and was pleasantly proven wrong -- especially with the skulls, snake and perfect alien-fetus-Voldemort hand. Then Barty Jr. (oddly reminiscent of Neil Gaiman, down to the leather jacket) stooped in front of the armchair, and I thought we were doomed. But it made sense by the end why they'd added the third person in the room, and I'm all in favor of plot re-arrangement if it spares us house elves, so as far as I'm concerned that's forgiven.

What I didn't like was that eliminating Dobby from the movie meant Neville had to steal the gillyweed from Snape; I can't see him overcoming his terror of the man to pull something like that, no matter how much Moody/Crouch'd been boosting his confidence. Maybe M/C nicked it for him while he nipped into the store room for more Polyjuice supplies. (P.S. Hello, Snape's supply closet! home of so many illicit fanfic encounters.)

Oh, Neville. What a treat to see Matthew Lewis do a dramatic scene instead of getting hung by his ears or cross-dressing the Snape Boggart. The poignancy of his reaction to the Cruciatus curse in the DADA lesson came as a wonderful surprise, as did his haunted look on the stairway after class. In fact the whole DADA scene was great; they really captured the shift in emotion from hilarity to horror when Moody/Crouch explained exactly what one can be made to do under the Imperius curse. Ha, and he hurled chalk at Seamus. One question: Why do teachers in the movies keep interrupting Hermione? First Lupin and now Moody/Crouch.

Okay, here's another question: Where'd all the students go? The tables in the Great Hall seemed halved at least, the stands at the tournament events seemed smaller than those at Quidditch matches in the previous movies, and it looked like there were only a few dozen kids jumping around to the Weird Sisters. They did strike a balance with the multiculturalism: no 90%-white student body nor an unexplained black kid talking about Grims and catching smoke, just a bunch of diverse students not calling attention to their diversity. (The only "look!" moment I noticed, not counting the various ethnic outfits at the Ball, was the group of Africans at the World Cup.) Nice that that should finally happen in the movie for the book where one of the themes is learning to befriend people who are different from you.

On a semi-related note, it was amusing to watch the one-upmanship continue with the design of Hogwarts castle. "Oh yeah? I'll see your spiral staircase and raise you a triple turret."

The graveyard scene didn't scare the bejeezus out of me as I'd hoped, but two others were frightening, unexpectedly: the World Cup attack and the first minute or two of the dragon task. Maybe it was the Death Eaters' incomprehensible chanting, the panic and tumult and fireballs, Harry getting kicked in the head or the hollow cry of the Dark Mark afterwards, but the whole attack had me riveted. (And while we're on the Dark Mark, I don't know why, considering it's magical, but I didn't ever imagine that it moved, either in the sky or as a tattoo, so that was cool.) The lack of Muggle torture was regrettable. I guess Mike Newell and/or Steve Kloves didn't want to spend the time explaining the DEs' prejudiced philosophy when there was a Hungarian Horntail to chase Harry around half of Scotland. That's one scene I would have trimmed (along with a few of the underwater shots) to make more time for the graveyard scene -- though I did like how the Horntail scrabbled for purchase on the roof tiles.

So. The graveyard. Overall, pretty good. It did feel rushed but I didn't think it got ruined as badly as the Shrieking Shack did in the PoA movie (but again, maybe that's a reflection of my investment in the Marauders). Ironically enough, my main complaint about this scene upon first viewing was that Cedric didn't die soon enough. He should have gone down the moment they arrived, instead of letting them take a mini-tour while genius Harry figured out where they were.

As for the rest of it, it was good that the concoction of the resurrecting potion went quickly because they're supposed to whiz by as Harry still tries to wrap his mind around the fact that Cedric's been killed, although Wormtail did chop his hand off with minimal effort, no writhing and no blood (kids' movie, blah blah). His double cry when Wormtail sliced his arm was unexpectedly believable.

Yes, I was happy to discover that Daniel Radcliffe has added a fourth emotional state to his repertoire: agony. I say that cheekily, but as opposed to his usually less than convincing performance (need I say more than "attempting to cry on the rock after fleeing the Three Broomsticks in PoA"?), he was really good at this. His spasms under Crucio aroused my inner sadist in a way not experienced since Luke shuddered under the Emperor's zaps in "Return of the Jedi," and the whole gasping/shouting/wide-eyed exchange with Voldemort as he touched Harry's scar was deliciously creepy. I'll take that over Cedric's suggestive bath comment any day.

As for Voldemort, well, yesterday I was very happy with what Ralph Fiennes did, even if there was an uncertain moment at first when I almost laughed because I remembered that New York Times comment about the Butoh dancer from Hell. His face turned out about how you would have expected based on Quirrell!mort in the first movie. Wish his eyes had been properly red though. He moved well, he had the right amount of melodrama, he properly intimidated his followers (except for Lucius, and how on Earth did he get away with standing up? especially when he's taller?). Loved his half-smile when he murmured that when Harry begged for death he would oblige. But something was off about him -- something that detracted from his power as a villain -- and I can't put my finger on what, exactly. synn was a bit put off by his flippancy, but we agreed afterwards that it could be ascribed to his enthusiasm for being properly corporeal again after 13 years. Thoughts welcome.

While we're in the graveyard, let me add that having the Death Eaters arrive via the Dark Mark in the sky was a nice touch, even if they appeared too sparsely and too quickly. At least the first problem was fixed as the scene progressed and more caped crusaders trickled in. Was that Bellatrix for a split-second at Voldemort's left side after Harry re-emerged from behind the tomb?

And where was the bit about "One, too cowardly to return, one who I believe has left me forever, and one who remains my most faithful servant"? Too complicated?

The KKK thing wasn't as awful as anticipated and the costuming was appropriately scary when they torched the tents at the World Cup but it was a poor choice to have the masks cover only half the face (not to mention Lucius' hood/hair faux pas) when the members aren't supposed to all know one another. I mean, if they'd worn those masks back in the day, Karkaroff should've been able to rattle off at least a dozen names for the Wizengamot.

James & Lily came out in the right order and weren't too annoying, which was nice. I don't know what was up with the shaving cream when Expelliarmus met Avada Kedavra (and again with the Star Wars reference, blue and pink lightsabers evenly matched), but the powerful hum of the arcs of wand-light rang true for me.

The return from the graveyard was devastating. Devastating. As far as I can remember, only two scenes in the books consistently move me (the Shrieking Shack Marauders revelations, right about when Sirius yells, "THEN YOU SHOULD HAVE DIED!"; and the tense wait around the kitchen table at 12 Grimmauld Place to hear about Mr. Weasley's condition after the snake attack). This makes a third. Harry sobbing and clutching the body, traumatized, while the blissfully ignorant audience cheers -- then falters -- and Amos crying "My boy" in the silence, after the adorable father/son shoulder-chucking send-off they had... And for us and the Wizarding audience to realize that every single person about to be killed in this war is going to provoke the same reaction from a loved one... Oh, man. They nailed it.

Bad choice to show Cho (who is now apparently Scottish) crying, though, considering the implications for people who've read the next book; at the IMAX today you could hear people snickering.

The denouement could have been worse. Dumbledore's speech to the assembled masses about Cedric was necessarily truncated but still touching. The real Moody waving up from the bottom of the trunk was funny, though that wasn't really the time for funny. But I can't believe Dumbledore didn't explain to Harry that his and Voldemort's wands share Fawkes' feathers. Couldn't they have shucked the bed-curtains anecdote for that? That whole scene was off. The "what is right and what is easy" comment lacked its power taken out of the context of the rest of his speech to Harry; and was that supposed to be the infamous "gleam" when his eyes sort of widened and he murmured "Priori Incantatem"? Not to mention, Dumbledore wouldn't set foot in the dormitories unless something awful had happened.

A few miscellaneous complaints: Fleur wasn't cold enough, even taking into account that they dropped the whole veela premise. Snape wasn't mean enough (though I wouldn't trade his comic relief study period scene for anything -- whacking Ron and Harry with his notebook and hitching up his sleeves will always, always be funny; I guess that's GoF's answer to the tap-dancing spiders). Miranda Richardson needed to pick a direction and run with it, because Rita Skeeter didn't do it for me -- the broom cupboard comment cut, but otherwise she was only a lukewarm presence. Hermione and Krum making eyes at each other from the beginning. There was no need for Karkaroff's teeth to be that disgusting. And what was with the sudden surge in Evil Rings? And the sighing butterflies/stick-stomping acrobatic floor show of an entrance for Beauxbatons and Durmstrang? And the identical uniforms? -- I couldn't help but think of Star Trek and how the humans always get to be diverse while the alien race wear the same clothes/have the same skin tone/hair color/style etc.

Anyway. Things I didn't realize I'd like in the movie:

• McGonagall's horrified reaction to ferret-Draco.
  
• Copious screen time for the Weasley twins (the aging potion/wrestling match; "Try saying that five times fast"; propositioning Angelina).
  
• The Pensieve. I hadn't been expecting to see the effect until the fifth movie, but there it was and it was just right -- the slight effort it took to pull the thought out, the sticky/electric texture of the thought-strand when it came free, and the jellyfish-looking ring as it floated into the basin. The surface wasn't quite right and the Pensieve itself was much larger than I'd pictured it, but the important part was very satisfying.
• Okay, and Filch was really funny when he ran up to Dumbledore at the Welcoming Feast. And waltzing with Mrs. Norris? Are there any theories out there about a pre-feline Mrs. Norris being a woman Filch loved and then he couldn't fix her having turned into a cat because he's a Squib? Anyone?

Things I didn't realize I'd miss until they weren't in the movie:

• Snape blasting the rose bushes.
• Snape showing his Dark Mark to Fudge / Fudge "accidentally" letting the Dementor get Barty Jr. / Dumbledore sending Snape out on his mission.
• "Lie low at Lupin's."
• Harry hiding on the stairs under the cloak with the Map while Snape sniffs around.
• The prize money. When Fudge plonked the bag of Galleons down in front of Harry after all he'd been through, it was such an empty gesture I wanted to cry. I can only imagine what that would have added to this scene in the movie.
• Mrs. Weasley.
• "Constant Vigilance!"
• The creatures in the Hedge Maze of Doom. Even though the animals and whatever were only in there as a sort of series of practical exams, to have the maze just be foggy and tall while the kids wandered around didn't pose the same kind of threat or offer the sense of accomplishment or failure they got in the book after defeating or being defeated by the challenges.
  

Last but not least, 'shippy silliness: Ferret in the pants! Cedric inviting Harry to the bath! Hear the cries of the fangirls as Harry slips into the bath OMGNOSHIRTMUSCLY!!11! Ron yoinking the covers up to his chin at the Burrow when Hermione wakes him! Karkaroff and Snape in the potions closet! Snape and Harry in the potions closet! Harry and Rita Skeeter in the broom closet! Voldemort panting in Harry's face! Twincest! Twins-and-Hermione sandwich! Snape and Ron and Harry in the study hall! Barty Jr. licking Snape's wand! Mme. Maxime nibbling out of Hagrid's beard! Oh wait, that was just gross.

Comments

[catilinarian.livejournal.com]

Excellent analysis! I agree with you on most points; I'd add (and I have to mention that the Very Clever Flatmate actually brought this up first) that, in addition to Cedric's death being quicker, the line, "Kill the spare," should have been more offhand. That's part of what makes it so incredibly chilling.

(At the slash conference I was at recently, we were discussing genuine evil in fandom, and into a pause in the conversation someone said quietly, "Kill the spare." It was pretty much agreed to be one of the finest sociopathic moments ever.)

The destruction of World Cup Tent-o-rama was satisfyingly creepy, more so than the graveyard, but then, I was prepared for the graveyard scene; the extent of the destruction and panic at the World Cup was much greater and more vivid than I'd imagined. It was, in a surreal way, both magical/otherworldly and graphically realistic - you were simultaneously terrified of these unearthly creatures with skull masks and slippery, half-heard chants, and worried about things catching fire or people being trampled to death in the stampede.

I agree with you on SO many of the good points, but I'll just mention - Snape pushing up his sleeves to whack Harry and Ron is utterly classic. Best. Moment. EVAH.

I actually had two major gripes that you didn't get into: first of all, the blatant sexism of the film. Hermione, who's busy being brilliant and discovering her rather appealing politically militant side in the book (she reminds me of my friends in high school, who spent a lot of their time putting up "Stop the Sanctions on Iraq" posters, which could be why I find Political Hermione so endearing), is worse than useless in the movie. She cries, she hugs, she looks pretty. Hello, Central Casting, could you send up a token chick, please? I'm seriously displeased with the way the movies are increasingly GUTTING Hermione's character. On top of that, we have the flitting "lovely girls" of Beauxbatons contrasted with the striding "proud sons" of Durmstrang. SINCE WHEN IS BEAUXBATONS ALL FEMALE? What about the beautiful boys in blue who steal the Patil twins away from (an unprotesting) Harry and Ron?

The other thing is the flattening of Barty Crouch's character. I realise that a full explanation of the whole death-faking would have taken up a good twenty minutes on its own, but I found the flashback to Barty's trial very affecting in the book. Here he is, fresh-faced young boy, fallen in with the wrong crowd, screaming for his daddy to take pity on him - and Crouch turns away from him. It's the ultimate character note for Crouch, and it leaves you uneasily wondering whether poor Barty was just in the wrong place at the wrong time, which adds an extra punch to the revelation at the end. Here, we just get the, "Look at me, daddy, I'm so EVIL!" maniacal grin. Disappointing.

But yes, overall, I think it was fantastic, and Harry, Ron, and Neville have really grown into their roles beautifully.

[synn.livejournal.com]

Personally, I find the books blatantly sexist, so the movie continuing that is more what I expect and less a disappointment. I was just happy to see that cho looked like a real girl (as opposed to a magazine cover) despite, as moony has pointed out, the inexplicable scottish accent.
I don't, however, believe that hermione would have chosen a pink dress with little fluttery bits of cloth all over the bottom.

[catilinarian.livejournal.com]

I have to say, I don't find the books that sexist. Yes, the girls are more inclined to scream and cry and hug than their male counterparts, but we also see boys inclined to sulk, rage, and go into spasms of fear. Hermione's a pretty strong character, as are Tonks and McGonagall. (I particularly love the way that Umbridge, who is blatantly clinging to "her" man, Fudge, in the role of the cloying/manipulative wife who will both take care of him and be advanced by him, assumes that McGonagall is doing the same with Dumbledore, and McGonagall treats the implicit suggestion with the contempt it deserves.) So is Lily, come to that, and Ginny.

But I'm with you on the dress. Urgh.

[maddy-harrigan.livejournal.com]

How do you find the books sexist? What about Hermione? McGonogall? Lily? Tonks? That's a diverse group of women who each have their own passionate interests and who consider it completely normal to follow them, be it scholarship or counter-intelligence or even warfare!

And as the flatmate pointed out, "you've got Umbridge, who's a simpering woman who spends her whole life sucking up to Fudge, and can't imagine that McGonogall is any different with Dumbledore." I think the fact that she's a VILLAIN is about as far away from being sexist as you can get.

[bironic.livejournal.com]

synn will argue this better than I'm about to, but here's my knee-jerk response. It's not that all the women/girls are helpless & hopeless while all the men/boys take charge with confidence. It's that not only are there many more male characters, a much higher percentage of the female ones are stereotypically flawed (need I say more than "Cho in OotP"?).

Hermione, Lily and Tonks have their strengths and I wouldn't include McGonagall under the sexist example, but also remember --

Hermione: Cries when it's not really called for (ooh, you'll have my head for that one), is very emotional (again, not that there's anything wrong with being emotional, it's just a traditionally feminine characteristic and most of the other male schoolchildren don't exhibit this), and is hardly ever allowed to participate in the action/face the villain.
Lily: All we know is she gave up her life. Her action may be heroic but it's a "feminine," maternal one: passivity & sacrifice, for her child.
Tonks: Totally falls apart over love for a man.

As for the female villains (Umbridge, Bellatrix, Skeeter), I don't see how Rowling making them villains negates her being in some ways sexist. If being villainous is necessarily masculine, the characters' methods are nevertheless feminine: Skeeter's main threat is the feminine power of gossip, Umbridge simpers and manipulates, Bellatrix would probably prostitute herself to Voldemort if this weren't a children's series (she also can't handle any insinuation that she might not be his "favorite," something that doesn't so visibly rattle Malfoy, Snape or the other male Death Eaters). I wish you had the conference proceedings from Convention Alley and Accio - Carla Hodge's Degrees of Evil and Kimberly Lesk's Triple Gorgon Threat spring to mind.

[catilinarian.livejournal.com]

Okay, I must agree with you about Bellatrix and Umbridge - I think the problem is not so much in the portrayal (Barty Crouch is about as irrational/hysterical and slavishly devoted to being Voldie's favourite as Bellatrix is), but rather that we don't get other female villains whose villainy is less stereotyped. The male villains have more variety to them. On the other hand, I'd say that Umbridge's very stereotypically feminine nastiness (the cutesyness, the cloying, the manipulation, the dependence on Fudge) is precisely what Rowling is reviling, particularly by blatantly contrasting her, as I mentioned above, with McGonagall.

As for the heroines, though, I do have a few objections:

Hermione: Cries when it's not really called for (ooh, you'll have my head for that one), is very emotional (again, not that there's anything wrong with being emotional, it's just a traditionally feminine characteristic and most of the other male schoolchildren don't exhibit this), and is hardly ever allowed to participate in the action/face the villain.

The male schoolchildren don't get very emotional? I'd say that they get EXTREMELY emotional, but in more typically "male" ways - and perhaps we're being prejudiced ourselves if we consider male emotionality somehow "not as bad" (read: not as irrational/hysterical) as female emotion. Harry nearly derails the war effort in OotP because he's pouting and snarling at everyone. Ron is one of the most consistently emotional and irrational characters in the series - he's forever sulking, flouncing, blowing up at people, and having diva-esque fits of jealousy. Don't even get me started on drama queen Draco. It's only if we consider male anger more "respectable" than female tears (as society conditions us to) that Hermione becomes more emotional. Significantly, Hermione has almost never rendered herself useless to the cause by being too emotional, while both Harry and Ron have for large amounts of time. She can work through the bad patches (in PoA she manages to research Hagrid's defence for Buckbeak on top of her insane course load, even though she's upset about her friendship with Harry and Ron; in HBP she's depicted as far more dedicated to the war than Ron, who's the one of the pair actually letting his romance interfere with his work), and is explicitly praised in Philosopher's Stone for "cool logic" in the face of danger.

As for facing danger, I think that, again, the best comparison is with Ron, who has participated in the action about as much as Hermione has. Consider the climaxes of the books so far:

PS - Ron and Hermione both join Harry in chasing Quirrel through the obstacle course; Ron is disabled early on. Hermione accompanies Harry one level further, and only turns back when it's clear only one of them is allowed to continue.
CoS - Ron does get to go with Harry on this one, true, but again, he's kept back from the final confrontation with Tom Riddle. Hermione sits this round out only because she's already faced the basilisk and survived through cunning (the mirror).
PoA - Hermione and Ron are both in the Shrieking Shack; Hermione gets to accompany Harry on the time-travelling journey and sort out a lot of the cleverer bits while Ron sits at home fretting.
GoF - Harry's flying solo on this one.
OotP - All three of Our Intrepid Heros end up at the Department of Mysteries, and all three fight the Death Eaters. Both Ron and Hermione are incapacitated.
HBP - Ron and Hermione both fight the Death Eaters in the Great Hall.

That's almost dead even.

Continued...

[catilinarian.livejournal.com]

Lily: All we know is she gave up her life. Her action may be heroic but it's a "feminine," maternal one: passivity & sacrifice, for her child.

Yes, the image is stereotypically feminine, but it's a powerful feminine archetype - the strong, protective mother goddess rather than the passive maternal martyr. Remember, James sacrificed his life for his child, too, and it could be argued that his was the more passive sacrifice - Lily was given a choice, and actively chose to die to protect Harry.

Tonks: Totally falls apart over love for a man.

Okay, I lied - I don't actually have an argument against that one. You got me there. The most I can do is stick my fingers in my ears and say that la la la la la, TONKS/REMUS DOES NOT EXIST! And despite the fact that that's my personal credo, it's hardly productive when I'm, you know, operating in the real world instead of in Catherine's Personal Canon-Rewriting Fantasyland. ;)

[maddy-harrigan.livejournal.com]

"GoF - Harry's flying solo on this one."

Well, yes, but it's Hermione's research and training that gets him through the dragon test, isn't it? He's sort of sitting around freaking out, and Hermione goes to him and says, "look, bitch, you're going to actually have to face the dragon, so maybe you should have something vaguely resembling a PLAN???"

While Ron is completely useless throughout.

As for the villainesses, bad aspects of traditionally feminine behaviour (sucking up to powerful men, being socially manipulative) are portrayed as BAD, and I think this is actually a feminist element of the books. Umbridge and Bellatrix define their whole existences around the men they serve, and they're BAD. Skeeter is a manipulative prissy bitch, and that's BAD. Feminism isn't just a question of having stereotypical "spunky heroines" and nothing else; it's a question of having a range of behaviours and archetypes in your female characters, and in holding up the most ennobling ones as the good ones. Feminism isn't just about providing "good role models for our daughters," it's about recognising women as the challenging and complex human beings they are - neither all good nor all bad. We do ourselves no service if we pretend that women have to be entirely cool and good and heroic in order to be good women. Where would we go with the bad parts of ourselves? How is it a good thing to tell little girls that those parts of themselves don't exist?

The women in fairy tales are both good AND evil. We acknowledge that good and evil both exist within the same woman, and hold up the better parts (brave, clever, kind - most fairy tale heroines are all three, once you get beyond Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty and into a richer body of folklore) as the ones to emulate. By showing a woman like Bellatrix, we give the girl who is inclined towards that behaviour a safe place to work through her desires, to play with both their appeal and their horror, and by showing those desires ultimately defeated, we encourage her in her resolution of her internal conflicts.

As for Lily, I agree with Catilinarian - I think there's a great deal of power in the "Mama Bear" response. What's WRONG with being maternal? Lily stood up to the Dark Lord and basically said "BRING IT ON - YOU WILL NOT TOUCH MY BABY." I think that's a damn powerful thing to do!

The woman was an intelligent and respected member of the Order; it's made clear that she had brains and that she used them. Feminism isn't in the business of telling women that having babies and caring about them is bad!

More below on Tonks.

[maddy-harrigan.livejournal.com]

Okay, I thought catilinarian mentioned Tonks in a different post, so I thought I'd separate my comments about her, but it turned out to be the same, so I'm just being annoying.

As for Tonks, the question is twofold: first of all, is she *REALLY* falling apart over love for a man, or is she evil/Imperiused? I think we need to withhold judgment on that one. Secondly, isn't Remus portrayed as similarly falling apart over love for a woman? Don't people who have problems in relationships with strong emotions tend to fall apart? To say that women can never struggle, can never be weak, can never be distracted or have problems, is anti-feminist. Tonks is a strong and capable Auror who's going through a really rough time, and who are we to say that she's not allowed to because it makes her look bad? Feminism isn't about being strong and resilient and tough ALL THE TIME. That's unrealistic and will eventually turn us all into guilty wrecks when we fail to live up to it.

[catilinarian.livejournal.com]

I'm holding out for Evil Tonks, personally. :)

Seriously, though, I don't think I'd consider Remus to be "falling apart" over Tonks. Sure, he stares moodily into the fire at Christmas, but it's not really clear what that's about - after all, he just lost his best friend (and potentially lover, but that's my interpretation) half a year earlier, and he's just recently gotten back from what, going by his description, must have been a very difficult and unsettling spell living with feral werewolves whose lifestyle flies in the face of all his desperate attempts to be a normal, harmless human. And that's really all we get from him on the topic, except an overwhelming sense of reluctance. He might be conflicted about Tonks, but he's not falling apart over her.

And while I don't deny that women in literature should be allowed to have strong emotions and show weakness, I wouldn't classify having an unrequited crush as "going through a really rough time". Sure, they can hurt quite a lot, but it seems rather a petty, common, even selfish consideration to be sapping SO much of Tonks' strength. I mean, if she loses both the (very strategically valuable) ability to transform and her concentration because a man she likes won't go out with her, how is she going to cope with the difficulty and losses of a genuine war? Harry and Hermione both manage to remain effective while still giving themselves over to the powerful feelings involved in their own individual romantic dramas, and they're teenagers! Tonks is a grown woman and a trained Auror!

[catilinarian.livejournal.com]

You all want to know something scary?

She wrote that WITHOUT looking at my comment above it.

OMG WTF GET OUT OF MY BRAIN! :)

No, actually, this is the only drawback to having someone to manically discuss the entire film with on the bus ride home at 3 am - your arguments tend to blend...

[bironic.livejournal.com]

Am going to have to ponder your points & decide whether there's a counterargument left! Very convincing. Must remember to check the books before jumping in next time.

P.S. I didn't see your comment either. LJ sure chose a great weekend to move its servers. Comments appear out of nowhere and the email notifications are sporadic at best. Sigh.

[bironic.livejournal.com]

Oh, yes about Barty Jr. being transformed into a rabid snake-boy. I'd forgotten that he cried for help from his father and that's most of why he hated him so much (and Moody, too, for having foiled his escape).

You're right, the "kill the spare" line could have been much more effective if it'd been delivered the way you describe it. More on that under synn's comment below.

Neville's grown into it, definitely, and Ron had some opportunities to actually act this time instead of look terrified (but they couldn't resist the spider thing, could they? now we'll have plenty of evidence by movie 7 that Ron can't stand spiders, but nothing on Snape hating the Marauders or Dumbledore trusting him), but Harry IMO still has a ways to go.

[musicisbelievng.livejournal.com]

wow... i actually read that whole thing. and understood about half of it. yeah. glad you enjoyed (most of) it.

[bironic.livejournal.com]

Aw, were you that bored? :)

Now when I make you watch the movie on DVD you'll know some of what's going on.

[synn.livejournal.com]

I agree the neville wouldn't have had the courage to steal the gillyweed, and the movie never actually said he did - only that he was the one to pass it on to harry. I was pleased that it wasn't dobby, as I truly dislike his character, esp. on screen.

I disagree about the creatures in the maze - I think it was more powerful without them. Putting in creaters runs the risk of looking cheap or funny, while the moving bushes and implications of creatures on the other side gave a better sense of the chilly creepiness of the maze. Kind of like the horror movie idea that it's scarier when you don't know what you're up against. It also fit well with dumbledoor's speech about people losing themselves in the maze - though I found that bit too prolonged and slightly hokey sounding.
I loved the return from the cemetary, for the emotional impact, but was a bit disturbed by the fact that the audience seemed to have shrunk from a stadium size (if you recall the start of the task shots) to maybe a small bleacher.

The deatheaters at the world cup didn't disturb me, but I agree that they did well with the panic and the trampeling crowds.
The DADA unforgiveables class was Fantastic - the shift you mentioned from funny to serious was Perfect.
Filch was funny, running up to dumbledoor, but it was also a few extra seconds of film that could have been more effectively used elsewhere.
The weasley twins were Great.

And finally, my reason for posting -
I think the 'something off' in the graveyard scene is that voldemort isn't scary. He's just too funny. 1) because he's so flippant, which could have been done to some extent while still combined with a more sadistic/serious/sociopathic side, and 2) because he starts out (in fetal form) looking a bit too rubbery.
I think the scene would have been more effective if his ressurection had been shorter, kill the spare and other such sociopathic lines had been delivered differently, and the camera angles had played him and the deatheaters up as imposing - looming - as is, they look like everyday people. which, of course, they are, and works in the world cup scene), but at the moment of his ressurection the audience should see it more as harry might - he's about to die, it's fairly certain - an extrodinarily powerful and insane wizard is standing before him with a backing of loyal followers, it's daunting.
To give a specific example, I would have changed the bit where voldemort presses his thumb to harry's forhead and screams mockingly, to be more like the bathroom scene in the professional, something vaguely disturbing, an almost loving brush of his thumb over harry's scar that maybe gets harder, and instead of mocking him with screams that are funny to the audience, show a true relish of harry's pain; a sigh through an open mouth, flicker of a smile, etc. etc.
I'm going to stop now b/c i have to go to bed.

[bironic.livejournal.com]

The movie didn't say Neville did it, but that's one of two explanations I can think of with the material they gave us (the other being Crouch/Moody).

Yes, Dumbledore's warning about "losing yourselves" came across as hokey - maybe that's why I felt the substitution of groaning fog for the Sphinx etc. didn't work. But really -- what did Fleur see? what bewitched Krum? I didn't get the impression that there were really Things in the maze, just mist, wind and possibly sentient hedge/roots.

Yes, I've been trying to figure out why Voldemort wasn't scary. He looked scary. He said scary things. He did scary things. I liked the alien-fetus thing, actually more than what I'd been picturing in the book -- his long limbs and digits looked better than my pale baby. Not sure how much of a difference the camera angles would have made, whether it would have been effective or overkill to shoot up at the DEs like they did with Mme Maxime. The melodrama thing was a problem, both with the "spare" line and when he's taunting Harry; if he'd slowed down and said his lines more offhand like catilinarian said, he would have been scarier. There's something about Tom/Voldie's menace that doesn't translate here.

And you're so absolutely right about his behavior with the scar. Oh, if he'd stroked it, closed his eyes and smiled...

I think that plays into the bigger picture of needing to spend more time there and using silence rather than noise and action to convey the terror Harry was feeling, the conviction that he was facing death.

[catilinarian.livejournal.com]

And you're so absolutely right about his behavior with the scar. Oh, if he'd stroked it, closed his eyes and smiled...

YES, you're both spot on about that. And I think it would fit better with the text as well - ahem. And I quote:

"Harry felt the cold tip of the long white finger touch him [mind you, this is his cheek, not his scar], and thought his head would burst with the pain. Voldemort laughed softly in his ear, then took the finger away and continued addressing the Death Eaters."

So very cold, so very lordly. That's what I felt was missing.

As for the maze, I think it would have worked either to have there be creatures in the maze (not necessarily seen, but confirmed in some way), or to go entirely in the other direction, which I thought they were for a while, and have some quality of the maze itself drive you mad and make you "lose yourself", so that the only things actually in there are you, your opponents, and your own demons. Yes, it's a little "Star Wars", but I think it would be a fitting third task to have you facing off directly against each other. However, we were left with too many questions about which way to interpret the maze scene, particularly (for me) Krum's enchantment. Did he just lose it in the maze? Was he Imperiused by Moody/Crouch (as in the book)? Should we associate the "madness" that made him turn on his opponents with the impulse that nearly made Harry abandon Cedric, and if so, why were Krum's eyes milky and Harry's normal? If you're going to make the maze full of concrete dangers, do it; if you're going to make it a symbol of some inner struggle, do that. Just let us know, is all I ask. :)

(I think we were supposed to assume that what Fleur saw was Krum, as he was standing over her after that. But I'm not sure.)

[bironic.livejournal.com]

The arrogant nobility was definitely underplayed -- another item on the list of not-quite-rights for Voldemort.

Now you mention long fingers making painful caresses, I wonder how far the filmmakers were willing to go with Voldemort's cold, sensual treatment of Harry. I've read essays (e.g. http://elkins.theennead.com/hp/archives/000125.html & http://elkins.theennead.com/hp/archives/000135.html) detailing the graveyard scene as a thinly veiled homosexual rape narrative. On the one hand this is a movie for a general audience that includes children. On the other hand, they had a ball with Myrtle in the Prefects' bath...

If you're going to make the maze full of concrete dangers, do it; if you're going to make it a symbol of some inner struggle, do that.

Yes, that's it exactly! I wouldn't have minded that he cut the creatures if it had been clear that the champions were up against themselves or each other. ...What you said.

double standard.

[synn.livejournal.com]

veiled homosexual rape narrative = bad
unveiled heterosexual sexual harrassment = good.

such is the way of our great nation.

Re: double standard.

[bironic.livejournal.com]

Well, a big difference there is that the bath situation is embarassing, amusing and relatively harmless (she's young and a ghost; Harry could get out of the bath and put on a robe) while the graveyard is terrifying and violent (Voldie's the #1 or #2 most powerful wizard in the world; Harry has no options and no choice).

Re: double standard.

[synn.livejournal.com]

There is a big difference - My point is that w/ the lack of terrifying and violent maybe they should have reconsidered how the graveyard scene was played - it would have been doubly creepy if it was truly comparably to the bathtub scene.

That said,
The bathtub scene actually did disturb me. It disturbed me more than voldemort would have. I'm not really sure why that is, but I was physically uncomfortable with just how long it went on and myrtle's actions. don't get me wrong, it was brilliantly done, but it felt like sexual harrassment.
I know what it is that bothered me. It felt like sexual harassment to me, but we were obviously meant to laugh at it, which makes it all OK. Conversely, Voldemort is evil, and anything he implied with harry would have been clearly wrong, and yet another example of how he is evil.

do you see what i'm saying?

[catilinarian.livejournal.com]

Oh, random observation: Moody goes out of his way to point out the Foe Glass in the beginning of the film. The film's creators go out of THEIR way to make a CGI Foe Glass, complete with faint shadows that might - just might - be Dumbledore, McGonagall, and Snape. And after all that effort, do we SEE the damned thing again? Even a single pan over to the wall at the end, so we can realise that Our Intrepid Heros are, in fact, the ones reflected in the glass? No. So what was the point of that entire charade? (And didn't it represent two minutes that could have been allocated to Dumbledore explaining the wand thing, or to Dumbledore telling Harry that he trusts Snape absolutely?)

[bironic.livejournal.com]

Along with the announcement that Snape was a Death Eater and the establishment of Hagrid/Olympe, that was one of the dropped plot points that irked me. It was one thing not to be able to recognize the elderly male face that appeared when Moody/Crouch explained the Foe-glass to Harry in the beginning. But I was waiting for another shot of it just before Dumbledore & co. barged in. How much time would it have taken, really, for Harry to have glanced over and discerned the Headmaster -- or Snape, actually, because that would have been ambiguous enough still -- in the mirror before being rescued?

[mateo10.livejournal.com]

Hi :) I'll have to write another reply when I'm not quite so tired, just wanted to say how much I agree with you on the maze, twinsy goodness and Radcliffe hotness.
I was actually really disappointed by the maze, it wasn't really scary to me except for the horror-cliché with the fog and moving brambles. All in all I really missed Harry showing all that he'd learned, especially against Hagrids creatures (can't recall the name).
Another disappointment was Fiennes. Were was the raving lunatic? Would Voldemort allow Lucius to look down his nose at him? Was the fellow in need of a tan sprouting a hissy fit really Voldemort, lord of darkness?? I know they got the looks right but the sheer evilness I would expect from voldemort was strangely absent. And I know Fiennes has it in him, but perhaps his disregard for all things Potter is the cause of the rather lacking performance? (In my eyes that is :-)

The twins and Neville were simply fantastic and the bathtub scene will be dream material for some time. Oh and I found this:
http://youcantmakeitup.blogspot.com/2005/11/harry-potter-legal-age-countdown-clock.html.
This is so needed after seeing his chest, oh to be myrtle!

[bironic.livejournal.com]

True about Harry not getting to kick the maze's butt (or the grindylows'! Hermione's comment after that task whizzed by so fast, not to mention they cut that lesson out of the third movie, that there was no chance to appreciate that it'd been Lupin who'd taught Harry how to fight them). .

We've been trying to figure out what exactly contributed to Voldie's lack of menace. (see above) I don't think it was the makeup. for ex., synn pointed to his manic movements, lack of grace and incorrectly interpreted method of touching Harry's scar. And WHOA would Lucius NEVER have gotten away with what he pulled!

Funny about the countdown! I'll just sit back and watch everyone kill one another over who gets Daniel Radcliffe wait for the dust to settle, and then calmly discuss time-share plans with the sane fans for Jason Issacs, Alan Rickman and Ralph Fiennes.

[catilinarian.livejournal.com]

Hey, it's entirely possible to want to make a bid for all four. :)

[mateo10.livejournal.com]

Yay, then I get Felton all to myself! If I can get to him through the seething mass of manic fan girls that is...

I didn't realize that all my point had already been debated, that'll teach me to post before bed without reading all the comments :-D

I agree completely with the points about lacking coldness, and the thing you mentioned about the reference to rape in the graveyard scene sounds fascinating, I'll have to read the essays. I know he said he had to focus on the mood shift but that shouldn't have stopped him from shoving some evil tendencies.. just a few. He had an opportunity to make a villain to rival the emperor, and he didn't take it! I think he'll regret it later.

[bironic.livejournal.com]

I suspect you're right about RF not bringing much to the part. I read somewhere that he didn't read the book, just flipped to the back to the graveyard scene and acted based on that alone -- so he probably has no idea what's motivating Voldemort, where he came from or where he's going. It was similarly something of a shock to learn that Michael Gambon doesn't believe there's any subtext to Dumbledore or to the Harry Potter series as a whole... which explains a lot about his performance (shaking Harry?!).

[mateo10.livejournal.com]

Yes dumbledore was way off in this movie.. he's been getting worse with every one really. I think you're completely right, that the reason for both him and RF lies in their disregard for the books. It's sad that they agreed to the roles when they don't feel anything for their part, I think that's what's beginning to show.

I fear what this lack of enthusiasm will mean for the next two movies where Voldemort and especially dumbledore are so important key figures for the plot. The Voldemort we saw will not hold up in the ministry or Harry's visions. Nor will the Dumbledore we've seen have enough charisma to carry the part of weakening hero in book six, especially since he's never shown that much strength in the movies to begin with.

[(Anonymous)]

Nor will the Dumbledore we've seen have enough charisma to carry the part of weakening hero in book six, especially since he's never shown that much strength in the movies to begin with.

Absolutely - neither strength nor mystery. I've never felt like Michael Gambon's Dumbledore knew any more than he let on, much less that all his reactions were based on some secret, maddeningly inscrutable framework of knowledge to which we weren't admitted. I think it's very telling that the voice of Dumbledore in my mind is still Richard Harris'. He could have done so much more with that role, I think.

[(Anonymous)]

um, timeshare? I'm sorry, I don't *share* Alan :)

[catilinarian.livejournal.com]

You're so right about Ralph Fiennes having it in him to be much scarier - couldn't someone have sat him down and made him watch himself in "Red Dragon" before letting him at that scene, for goodness' sake?

[bironic.livejournal.com]

YES. Have just seen the A&E GoF special and posted about it.

Speaking also of nobility, it occurred to me today that there was a certain amount of the high-class or pretension in the way he held his wand. Delicately, with wrist bent, in a way none of the other characters have (including Lockhart), and either he had his pinky out or he may as well have. I'm thinking specifically of when he used Imperio to make Harry bow, though it also got screen time during Priori Incantatem when he held on with two fingers and Harry clutched his with both hands.

[mateo10.livejournal.com]

Hmm.. you're right. Which actually really fits his pureblood charade and character. I really have to go see the film again soon.

[mateo10.livejournal.com]

Ok, I’m more awake now and could actually comprehend what I read this time :-D So here’s the more coherent reply as promised.

I’m not sure Neville is supposed to have stolen the gillyweed. Either your theory about moody or perhaps he’s supposed to have found it himself (Hence the scene where he stands in the water with Harry). And as I said before, you’re so right about Neville (And Matthew Lewis! He’s grown up to be such a cutie and boy can he act).

You’re right about the hand too. It irritated me to no end that they cut away from it, and where was the suffering? It hurts like a mother to cut of a hand, he looked ready for a spot of tea afterwards! In total I wasn’t that impressed by Wormtail, there wasn’t quite enough grovelling, but considering Voldemorts lack of evil, I wouldn’t have grovelled either.

All in al I was very impressed by Radcliffe. He was very believable in this movie, and as you said the emotions didn’t seem stilted or fake as the last three movies. He was amazing, and the scene with Cedric when they return actually really moved me. All in all he, Lewis and the twins were simply amazing actors in this. On the other hand don’t get me started on Dumbledore, Lucius or Madeye...

I hadn’t actually thought of the similarities you mention to Star Wars and Trek. You’re right about the uniforms and entrance though, the time could have been better used elsewhere, and what’s with the capoeira?? Isn’t it from southern America as opposed to Russia/Bulgaria or where Durmstrang’s supposedly from.

Oh and completely agree on the too little Draco time, but the time he had was brilliant. I’m going to have to see the movie a couple of times before I make up my mind about liking it or not.

[bironic.livejournal.com]

I did think that Neville may have found the gillyweed himself, maybe in the lake in the scene where Ron tells Hermione to tell Harry about Hagrid. But then Snape implied that some had been taken from his supply room.

Dunno what was up with the martial arts/acrobatics either. I didn't know it was specifically Brazilian -- that makes it all the more out of place.

Re: Wormtail's bloodless and otherwise non-traumatic amputation, that was one of the moments where I imagined I could see Mike Newell behind camera frantically waving his hand and mouthing, "no time no time no time! keep moving!"

Did you have issues with Malfoy beyond the fact that he snubbed Voldie?

[mateo10.livejournal.com]

It was a strange experience seeing Isaacs in this movie. In the other three he was simply brilliant with his aristocratic, sneering attitude. In GoF something was missing imo, he seemed more stilted and thin. The attitude that makes Isaacs THE malfoy wasn't quite there. I found the scene at the world cup a bit strange and perhaps I've read to many torture-Lucius-till-he-drops fics, but in my mind Malfoy would never look down at voldemort like he did. I know he has his honor but he is still portrayed as being a devoted servant of voldemort.
I can't quite put my finger on it but something just wasn't right with Malfoy in GoF. What did you think of him? Maybe seeing the movie again will make me see things differently :)

You're probably right concerning the time issues and Wormtails hand, it just struck me as a bit of an anti-climax with the pop-goes-the-hand they had going. It seemed he had more of a hangnail than an amputated limb, but as it's been said they probably tried to keep it kid friendly as well as saving time.

Hmm.. forgot Snape said that in the movie... I'll have to agree with you that it seems strange. Neville might have grown up but he hasn't yet got the balls to steal from Snape. Perhaps it's a plot hole they missed?

[catilinarian.livejournal.com]

Yeah, the interaction in the graveyard felt wrong on both sides for me - Voldemort wasn't commanding enough, and Malfoy came off as more affronted (in a way that was practically condescending!) than terrified that Voldemort would question his loyalty.

I didn't really feel something off in the World Cup sequence, but then, Tom Felton had just walked on screen in a black suit and turtleneck, so my mind was a little muddled. :)

[mateo10.livejournal.com]

Boy do I know the feeling! My bf keeps looking strangely at me when I suggest he should put a black turtleneck on his christmas list this year :-D
It's too bad there was so little felton in this movie. But then agin the time he did have was really good for his part.