Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Harry Potter movie

Expand Messages
  • David King
    ... Stolzi@a... ... you know, ... study. In ... well, ... read ... somewhere ... Hey Liz, fear not we read The Narnia Series in our forth grade classes and
    Message 1 of 23 , Nov 17, 2001
      --- In mythsoc@y..., ERATRIANO@a... wrote:
      > In a message dated 11/17/01 4:03:46 PM Eastern Standard Time,
      Stolzi@a...
      > writes:
      >
      > << Sure, but I took him to mean "the canon" as in Dead White Males,
      you know,
      > the top stuff the hoomin race has produced, suitable for college
      study. In
      > which context Dr Seuss, however dead and white and male, is a bit,
      well,
      > ridiculous. >>
      >
      > Oh. Well. I guess I took him to mean, children's canon. We never
      read
      > Lewis in school at all. I was hoping there were grade schools
      somewhere
      > where they did. LOL.
      >
      > Lizzie

      Hey Liz, fear not we read The Narnia Series in our forth grade
      classes and The Deap Space trilogy in our Jr High. Most of my fifth
      grade class are tryng to finish The Hobbit before FOTR comes out in
      December.
      David
    • Stolzi@aol.com
      In a message dated 11/17/01 6:04:47 PM Central Standard Time, ... Since we re all back in our high chairs arguing :) I ll say that the delicate artistry of
      Message 2 of 23 , Nov 17, 2001
        In a message dated 11/17/01 6:04:47 PM Central Standard Time,
        WendellWag@... writes:

        > Dr. Seuss and Beatrix Potter are intended for a
        > younger audience but are about equal in level of invention.

        Since we're all back in our high chairs arguing :) I'll say that the
        delicate artistry of Beatrix Potter's drawings and the dry, astringent,
        ironic quality of her prose beats Seuss a mile in aesthetics, whatever we may
        say of "invention."

        Even allowing for the naturally more bumptious quality of most American art,
        I think Seuss is on a lower level.

        Baby Diamond Proudbrook
      • WendellWag@aol.com
        In a message dated 11/17/2001 10:23:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, ... I m willing to conceed that Seuss isn t as good as Beatrix Potter, but I still think that
        Message 3 of 23 , Nov 17, 2001
          In a message dated 11/17/2001 10:23:01 PM Eastern Standard Time,
          Stolzi@... writes:


          > Even allowing for the naturally more bumptious quality of most American art,
          >
          > I think Seuss is on a lower level.

          I'm willing to conceed that Seuss isn't as good as Beatrix Potter, but I
          still think that J. K. Rowling, Beatrix Potter, and Dr. Seuss are in the same
          league as far as quality, and that's below _The Chronicles of Narnia_ and
          _The Lord of the Rings_.

          Wendell Wagner


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • ERATRIANO@aol.com
          In a message dated 11/17/01 9:08:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, kidzero2525@yahoo.com writes:
          Message 4 of 23 , Nov 18, 2001
            In a message dated 11/17/01 9:08:58 PM Eastern Standard Time,
            kidzero2525@... writes:

            << Hey Liz, fear not we read The Narnia Series in our forth grade
            classes and The Deap Space trilogy in our Jr High. Most of my fifth
            grade class are tryng to finish The Hobbit before FOTR comes out in
            December. >>

            Sounds good, thank you. The Deep Space tril being the Ransom books? Is that
            its official name? Or was it Space Trilogy? Anyway that is heartening.
            Fifth grade, good deal. So when will they plug in some L'Engle? Wow, a
            curriculum that includes fantasy/sci fi. I wonder what the HS books list
            looks like. I hated almost everything we read in HS.

            Lizzie
          • WendellWag@aol.com
            In a message dated 11/18/2001 6:30:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, ... It s not clear that there is an official name for the series. I think Lewis once called it
            Message 5 of 23 , Nov 18, 2001
              In a message dated 11/18/2001 6:30:43 AM Eastern Standard Time,
              ERATRIANO@... writes:


              > The Deep Space tril being the Ransom books? Is that
              > its official name? Or was it Space Trilogy?

              It's not clear that there is an official name for the series. I think Lewis
              once called it the Deep Space trilogy in a letter, but I don't consider that
              an official pronouncement anymore than I consider his suggestion in another
              letter of the current order of the Narnia books to be an official
              pronouncement. I think Lewis's fans should be wary of taking suggestions
              Lewis made in letters now published in his Collected Letters as being
              anything else but what Lewis meant them as - just an offhand quick reply to
              his fans. Lewis kept certain of his ideas just to his letters because he
              didn't consider them to be fully thought through emough for his books. I, in
              any case, continue to mentally refer to the book as the Ransom series.

              Oddly, Lewis's suggestion in a letter to one of his publishers is now
              officially ignored. At one point, Lewis wrote the American publisher ot the
              books and asked for a few changes in the Narnia books, and the publisher used
              this suggestion. This was just a few names and such, so it's possible that
              you could read both versions and never notice the differences. These small
              changes were never made in the British editions, and this continued to be
              true until 1994, when the arbitrary decision was made to change the American
              editon to the way it was in the British edition, thus officially ignoring
              Lewis's later thoughts on this matter.

              Wendell Wagner


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • jamcconney@aol.com
              In a message dated 11/18/2001 9:12:59 AM Central Standard Time, ... Many years ago, when I first discovered the Space Trilogy (whatever), I wrote a fan letter
              Message 6 of 23 , Nov 18, 2001
                In a message dated 11/18/2001 9:12:59 AM Central Standard Time,
                WendellWag@... writes:


                > I think Lewis's fans should be wary of taking suggestions
                > Lewis made in letters now published in his Collected Letters as being
                > anything else but what Lewis meant them as - just an offhand quick reply to
                >
                > his fans.

                Many years ago, when I first discovered the Space Trilogy (whatever), I wrote
                a fan letter to Lewis. I didn't know then that Lewis had a policy of
                answering every letter, so I was putting an additional burden (however small)
                on him at a time when, unknown to most of his readers, his health was
                failing.

                At any rate, along with lots of appreciation, I noted my disappointment that
                he had never in _That Hideous Strength_ told us who the next Pendragon was to
                be. And in due time, I got the usual quick note: "I don't know who the next
                Pendragon was. The eldils didn't tell me."

                I treasured that note, but (alas) it was lost, along with other treasures in
                the same box, during one of several moves I've made since then. Sigh....

                J.A. McConney


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Stolzi@aol.com
                In a message dated 11/17/01 11:50:37 PM Central Standard Time, ... Agreed. Carl Sandburg s RUTABAGA STORIES might be more up on Beatrix Potter s literary
                Message 7 of 23 , Nov 18, 2001
                  In a message dated 11/17/01 11:50:37 PM Central Standard Time,
                  WendellWag@... writes:

                  > I
                  > still think that J. K. Rowling, Beatrix Potter, and Dr. Seuss are in the
                  > same
                  > league as far as quality, and that's below _The Chronicles of Narnia_ and
                  > _The Lord of the Rings_.

                  Agreed. Carl Sandburg's RUTABAGA STORIES might be more up on Beatrix
                  Potter's literary level than Seuss, but I can't say, bec it's a long time
                  since I read them.

                  Rowling I'd compare chiefly with Roald Dahl, as others have done before.

                  Diamond Proudbrook
                • James P. Robinson III
                  As the clock struck 10:42 AM 11/17/2001 -0500, Stolzi@aol.com took pen in ... I agree with you here. It seems to be a straightforward Norman French (like
                  Message 8 of 23 , Nov 20, 2001
                    As the clock struck 10:42 AM 11/17/2001 -0500, Stolzi@... took pen in
                    hand and wrote:
                    >I haven't seen it yet, but read USA Today's articles.
                    >
                    >They had some curious bits, like defining "Malfoy" from "maleficus," a
                    >medieval Latin word for witch. I'd always assumed it was rooted in "Bad
                    >Faith," from the old French spelling of =foi=, faith.

                    I agree with you here. It seems to be a straightforward Norman French
                    (like Grosvenor and many other aristocratic British names) compound: mal
                    (bad, evil) and foy (faith). The Norman French form of Foi is
                    Foy. Malfoy, therefore, signifies something like treachery. Seems more
                    likely, and more appropriate, than some sort of mangled contraction of the
                    late Latin Maleficus.

                    Jim


                    --
                    =================================================
                    James P. Robinson III jprobins@...

                    All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
                    author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with
                    an attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
                    given in writing.
                    =================================================
                  • James P. Robinson III
                    As the clock struck 01:05 PM 11/17/2001 -0500, Margaret Dean took pen in ... I believe this is the difference between classical Latin and late Latin. In the
                    Message 9 of 23 , Nov 20, 2001
                      As the clock struck 01:05 PM 11/17/2001 -0500, Margaret Dean took pen in
                      hand and wrote:
                      > >
                      > > They had some curious bits, like defining "Malfoy" from "maleficus," a
                      > > medieval Latin word for witch. I'd always assumed it was rooted in "Bad
                      > > Faith," from the old French spelling of =foi=, faith.
                      >
                      >That latter is how I'd interpret it, too. (Though I'd translate
                      >"maleficus" more literally as "evildoer" rather than "witch", and
                      >that's appropriate for the Malfoys as well!)

                      I believe this is the difference between classical Latin and late
                      Latin. In the Malleus Maleficorum (16th or 17th C.), the malefici being
                      discussed are definitely users of magic, rather than simply evil doers, but
                      I do not believe that sense of the word is extant in any classical Latin
                      text. Actually I am not sure maleficus even appears as a noun in classical
                      texts. I know it only as an adjective, meaning evil, wrong, etc. There is
                      a classical maleficum (or is it maleficium?) meaning evil deed, though.

                      Jim
                      --
                      =================================================
                      James P. Robinson III jprobins@...

                      All original material contained herein is copyright and property of the
                      author. It may be quoted only in discussions on this forum and with
                      an attribution to the author, unless permission is otherwise expressly
                      given in writing.
                      =================================================
                    • Michael Martinez
                      I have now seen the movie twice, and I am pretty sure I ll go see it again by the end of the week. This has to be one of the most enchanting fantasy movies to
                      Message 10 of 23 , Nov 20, 2001
                        I have now seen the movie twice, and I am pretty sure I'll go see it
                        again by the end of the week. This has to be one of the most
                        enchanting fantasy movies to come along in decades. The only serious
                        criticisms I've seen/heard for the movie are that it's too
                        predictable for people who have read the book and that it doesn't
                        live up to its billing. The latter came from a New York critic whose
                        opinion, I found, was not based on reality. They did an excellent
                        job of telling an interesting story and making the characters
                        believable and interesting (except, possibly, for Malfoy, who seemed
                        a bit cliched to me).

                        The first Potter movie may give be-faithful-to-the-book legions a new
                        piece of fat to chew over. Although it's my understanding a lot of
                        material has been omitted (for the sake of compression), people are
                        generally pleased with the storyline in the movie.

                        This one has the potential, I think, to grasp the popular imagination
                        in a way which hasn't happened since "The Wizard of Oz" was made. I
                        can only hope that "The Lord of the Rings" lives up to expectations,
                        because "Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone" has delivered on its
                        promise.

                        And the door to longer kids' movies may have been opened, although I
                        don't view this movie as a childrens' movie. The only mistake
                        AOL/Time Warner can make with the franchise at this point is to start
                        cutting corners on the production values, to "dumb down" the sequels
                        and turn out formulaic followups.
                      • WendellWag@aol.com
                        In a message dated 11/20/2001 1:26:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, ... Malfoy is cliched in the book. They would hardly be true to the book if he hadn t been
                        Message 11 of 23 , Nov 20, 2001
                          In a message dated 11/20/2001 1:26:58 PM Eastern Standard Time,
                          michael@... writes:


                          > They did an excellent
                          > job of telling an interesting story and making the characters
                          > believable and interesting (except, possibly, for Malfoy, who seemed
                          > a bit cliched to me).

                          Malfoy is cliched in the book. They would hardly be true to the book if he
                          hadn't been cliched.


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Trudy Shaw
                          ... From: Michael Martinez To: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 12:15 PM Subject: [mythsoc] Re: Harry Potter movie The only serious
                          Message 12 of 23 , Nov 20, 2001
                            ---- Original Message -----
                            From: Michael Martinez
                            To: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com
                            Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 12:15 PM
                            Subject: [mythsoc] Re: Harry Potter movie


                            The only serious
                            criticisms I've seen/heard for the movie are that it's too
                            predictable for people who have read the book...


                            This struck me as an interesting statement--is it a criticism from people who _don't_ think a movie should be quite so faithful to a book? Seems a well-done movie should find enough ways to surprise and excite people even if they do know the storyline.
                            --Trudy





                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Michael Martinez
                            ... Sorry for the lack of followup. Only a couple of people have said anything to me about the movie following the book so closely that they knew what would
                            Message 13 of 23 , Nov 24, 2001
                              --- In mythsoc@y..., "Trudy Shaw" <tgshaw@e...> wrote:

                              > This struck me as an interesting statement--is it a criticism
                              > from people who _don't_ think a movie should be quite so faithful
                              > to a book? Seems a well-done movie should find enough ways to
                              > surprise and excite people even if they do know the storyline.

                              Sorry for the lack of followup. Only a couple of people have said
                              anything to me about the movie following the book so closely that
                              they knew what would happen in advance. Both people indicated they
                              did not mind that kind of dogged faithfulness in the least, but one
                              said it did leave him missing something from the enjoyment he
                              normally gets out of movies. That is, seeing a film for the first
                              time, he likes to see the story unfold for the first time.

                              That person in particular said he felt "Harry Potter" was a good
                              justification for seeing the movie first and reading the book
                              afterward as a matter of principle, for people who are just
                              discovering stories which have been adapted to the screen.
                            • dianejoy@earthlink.net
                              Michael Martinez said:
                              Message 14 of 23 , Nov 26, 2001
                                Michael Martinez said:

                                << That person in particular said he felt "Harry Potter" was a good
                                justification for seeing the movie first and reading the book
                                afterward as a matter of principle, for people who are just
                                discovering stories which have been adapted to the screen. >>


                                Having just seen the HP film this last Sunday, I found myself comparing the book and the film, pleasantly surprised at how often the film matched my own imaginings. All the kids did very well, but Hermione was especially good, and both Hagrid and Snape stole the show. Of course, Snape's done by Alan Rickman, so I should not be surprised. Even the Dursleys matched my thinking---perfect. The FX were very striking---esp. the candles and jack o'lanterns hanging in space. The woods scenes were also interesting---and I loved the ghosts, too.

                                Definitely one I'd like to get on DVD.

                                Now I want to go back and read *Philosopher's Stone* again. (I'm convinced that if they'd kept the British name, we wouldn't be hearing nearly as much from a certain strain of evangelicals.) ---djb

                                The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org

                                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


                                --------------------------------------------------------------------
                                mail2web - Check your email from the web at
                                http://mail2web.com/ .
                              • Lisa Deutsch Harrigan
                                I doubt that calling it the Philosopher s Stone would have helped. None of these people have read the books, have any interest in reading the books... All
                                Message 15 of 23 , Nov 26, 2001
                                  I doubt that calling it the "Philosopher's Stone" would have helped. None of these people have read the books, have any interest in reading the books... All they see is the word "Witch" in any association with a book and want it banned. "Oh, I can't read the book it would condemn me to hell", an actual quote from a radio talk show I heard recently. These are also the people who want to ban the Wizard of Oz, fairy tales, and frequently The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (has Witch in the Title, not to mention Aslan is too much like Christ!).
                                  Basically, if it isn't the Bible they want it banned from Public Schools! Yes, PUBLIC Schools. So their children can go to tax payer supported Christian Safe Schools. Heaven forbid they should pay for the private Christian Education they want for their children...

                                  "What's wrong with a good Christian prayer in school?" asked the State Assembllyman in Florida in a public hearing in front of Rabbis and Mullahs, and whatever the Hundus call their holy men. *choke*

                                  These people don't think, they just do what their leaders tell them to do. Some of them even fly into buildings for Allah.

                                  By the way, we've seen HP once and are planning to see it again Real Soon.

                                  My husband read the book again on Friday after having seen the movie and said confirmed that little was left out, most of that not very cinematic, and thus left enough of the book to be considered a good adaptation.

                                  I haven't had time to read the books yet, and found the story easy enough to follow without having read the books. Some time in my copious spare time, I will have to read them all. I definitely want to... (Thyme can be bought at the grocery store <g>.)

                                  I liked all the kids. It's not easy to act when you are still young, and don't have much experience in life, but most of them seemed to nail their parts. The adults seemed comfortable, "Typecast", in their rolls as well. Jo did say that she saw actors in the various rolls as she wrote the books and was actually able to get some of them!

                                  Mythically yours,

                                  Lisa

                                  "dianejoy@..." wrote:

                                  >
                                  > Now I want to go back and read *Philosopher's Stone* again. (I'm convinced that if they'd kept the British name, we wouldn't be hearing nearly as much from a certain strain of evangelicals.) ---djb
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.