I WANT ALFONSO CUARÓN BACK!!!!!!
*sniff* I'm soooo disappointed...
really?!! I hated the 3rd movie. That was my favorite book and I was so looking forward to the movie, but...welll, they left out so much, and he left in all the pointless artsy shots that I could of seriously did without. lol. Well, now, the first two movies, they were close to the book (well, with the parts they included), a bit painful to watch, but they were harry potter movies!!
EDIT: I just read an article about Michael Gambon saying he doesn't want to read the books cos he feels it would ruin the illusion of the movies. I think that shows a total lack of respect for the story, the fans, his job. I don't know, I mean I'm not an actor but i've seen interviews with some actors who seem to go to great lengths to research their characters cos they feel it's part of their job and it's expected of them. At least this explains why Gambon's got it so wrong, in my opinion anyway.
I totally agree. I mean, I guess it could be easier to not read the books and create your own character, but in THIS series most people want the characters they know from the books! Also, Michael Gambon was never Dumbledore for me- Richard Harris, however, was unnervingly Dumbledoreish...
-I read somewhere that Alan Rickmam never read the books either, but he's pretty spot-on with Snape...hum
He's doing himself and everyone else a total disservice by not reading the book. It's even kinda disrespectful to the author. He's supposed to mold himself to the character. He's an actor, not an artist free to make it what he wants.
That's like trying to be Scarlet O'Hara without reading Gone With the Wind.
What research, this isn't exactly Shakespeare !! He's a faggot wizard ffs.
Michael Gambon is a highly trained Classical actor with years of stage and film work under his belt. For anyone doubting his abilities I suggest you take a look at his CV on wiki. Oh and by the way for those sneering at his Irish accent, you might like to take notice he's from fucking DUBLIN !!! the last time I checked that was in Ireland.
So since it's not Shakespeare and it's *just* Harry Potter it's ok that he doesn't take the trouble of reading about the character he's playing?? Like you said, the guy is a pro, so he should do this reaserch for every single part he accepts to play, regardless of what the film/play is about.
And just because he's done some great work in the past it doesn't mean that he can't suck in these particular films.
I don’t think anyone’s doubting his acting skills as much as we feel he isn't a good fit for a character in a book. If he wants to create his own characters, Harry Potter probably isn't the project he'll get any appreciation for.
I WANT ALFONSO CUARÓN BACK!!!!!!
*sniff* I'm soooo disappointed...
really?!! I hated the 3rd movie. That was my favorite book and I was so looking forward to the movie, but...welll, they left out so much, and he left in all the pointless artsy shots that I could of seriously did without. lol. Well, now, the first two movies, they were close to the book (well, with the parts they included), a bit painful to watch, but they were harry potter movies!!
ok yeah the first two were the best in terms of "closeness to the books", that's true. But they were also the "easiest" films, things only got really complicated afterwards ;)
and I remember Chris Columbus saying he didn't want to direct another Potter movie... he was the producer for the third movie, so I guess I could say, I WANT CHRIS COLUMBUS AND ALFONSO CUARÓN BACK!
(I liked the style of the third film, and I think Cuarón caught the 'spirit' of the potter films best... although I wanted to KILL the post-production team after watching the film for the first time, the whole marauder's map part lacked every sense of logic ;D)
I'm soooo afraid of what they will do to the seventh book! they're going to release the film in two parts - aaarrrgh.
I don't know anything about Harry Potter movies but books give the imagination a canvas without limit and in a movie is one projected vision albeit how it came together. It is like seeing into another mind. I say no frightening it may be surprisingly fine. Sorry if this is not ok here.
I think that many if not all of the crucial moments of the story lacked "drama" (I'm not sure if that's the word I'm looking for). I'm not saying it should be melodramatic, but it shouldn't be so ordinary either. It was like terrible things happened but people seemed to be not so concerned... I don't know how to say it...
Plus the relationship Dumbledore - Harry suckssss!
YEEES, it lacked DRAMA, that's it. Emotions, drama - and I'm sorry but the Harry/Ginny/Ron scenes were HILARIOUS in the book (remember the "monster" in Harry's chest?) and now they were just...blah... And Dumbledore's death was so dramatic in the book *sigh*, and the funeral, and Harry breaking up with Ginny, and and and... aaaarrrrgghhhh!
(I knew Daniel Radcliffe could be funny because *ahem* I saw him in a few interviews and his sense of humour was hilarious)
Oh and by the way for those sneering at his Irish accent, you might like to take notice he's from fucking DUBLIN !!! the last time I checked that was in Ireland.
Dubz
He's Irish-born but I'm pretty sure he's lived in Britain most of his life and in every interview I've seen with him he's got a british accent. I've no doubt he's a good actor, but he obviously has no interest in the role he's playing in these movies and I can't help wonder why he accepted the part.
So since it's not Shakespeare and it's *just* Harry Potter it's ok that he doesn't take the trouble of reading about the character he's playing??
Abso-Fucking-Lutely, it is "just" the Happy Rotter films, they are shit kiddie films. He's starring alongside kids who were casted for their look rather than their acting abilities. Most of the people he standing alongside are so wooden they should have branches!! It's a fantasy film, it's all about suspension of disbelief, he has more acting ability in his little finger than the rest of the cast put together (that includes Alan Rickman). Why the fuck should he bother researching the books, let's face it they are 2 dimensional kids books, with absolutely no charachter depth or perception or development, we're not talking Harper Lee or Stienbeck. THEY ARE KIDS BOOKS !!! just because adults read them doesn't make it otherwise. It's a typical modern day phenonomen which is just a fad, you think in years to come, they'll through out Bronte and you'll do your lititral degree in JK "Geebag" Rowling and Dan "Fuckwit" Brown.
When JKK Rowling writes Happy Rotter and the Genocide in Rwanada then it's made into a film then you come back and complain about his acting.
btw,
I saw Rowling on one of these documentaries recently and I very much admire some of her qualities, she's self made and seems never to forget it, also the fact that she sets aside some of her money for charitable causes also, I though, was very commendable. The fact that she reads through the begging letters and they decides who/which is most worthy rather than letting her accountant or some other minion do it. For that she gets my applause.
Dubz, I know you're a reader and I'm surprised you feel this way. If you wrote a book that was turned into a movie, wouldn't you hope that the actors had read your book? I know I would. I don't care if was a kids' book, a picture book or a comic book or what. He should read the books.
I don't even know if it's true or not that he didn't read the books. I just think any actor in any movie that was a book first should read the stinkin' book. It ain't gonna kill him.
Dubz, I know you're a reader and I'm surprised you feel this way. If you wrote a book that was turned into a movie, wouldn't you hope that the actors had read your book? I know I would. I don't care if was a kids' book, a picture book or a comic book or what. He should read the books.
I don't even know if it's true or not that he didn't read the books. I just think any actor in any movie that was a book first should read the stinkin' book. It ain't gonna kill him.
Kayte, I'm sorry my for my comments which were was a bit harsh but I feel I have to fight against the "lovely" comments, it's only equal to the feeling of the fans "love" for this fad, which I feel will soon pass and be forgotten. I agree it wouldn't kill Mr. Gambon to read these books and conduct a little research. However, I do feel that to be hounded by Happy Rotter fans for a throwaway comment is just as absurd. as I said it aint exactly shakespeare.
I wonder how upset JRR Tolkien got when his nephew first read "The Hobbit" and refererred to it being below him (think he was about 12 at the time)
Also don't you fucking dare give up on that thought of writing a children's book, just because some ol' crabbit Scots bastard is giving out about the Happy Rotter doesn't mean it's a dream. Go for it!! maybe someday we'll be watching your movies. ( I for one actually hope so !!!)
Dubz, I know you're a reader and I'm surprised you feel this way. If you wrote a book that was turned into a movie, wouldn't you hope that the actors had read your book? I know I would. I don't care if was a kids' book, a picture book or a comic book or what. He should read the books.
I don't even know if it's true or not that he didn't read the books. I just think any actor in any movie that was a book first should read the stinkin' book. It ain't gonna kill him.
Exactly.
It doesn't matter that this isn't exactly the finest piece of literature or if it's a fad. I'd be saying the same thing if I wasn't a Harry Potter reader. I'm not even a fan of the films and I agree with Dubz that the kids can't act. But it doesn't change my point one bit. If you're a pro, then it's your job to do things the right way and do a little research, whether it's a quality film or just a megaproduction to make money out of it. And it doesn't have anything to do with Michael Gambon's acting skills, which nobody has even questioned, it has to do with the way he portrays his character in these films.
