Stupid People writing reviews Misguided reviews.
Monday, July 23rd, 2007, 6:13 pm
Some lady wrote a review of the Fifth Harry Potter movie, and the people over at Gospelcom linked to it, so I read it. I had to shake my head and laugh. (here it is)
Regardless of her opinion on the entertainment value of the movie, she makes two comments that are quite revealing about her familiarity with the Harry Potter saga:
- “I think the film could have been stronger, more entertaining, and less bleak, and still remained very true to the original story.”
- “And Quidditch—what is a Harry Potter story without Quidditch?!?”
As anyone who actually read the book would know (and she implies that she has in the first comment), Harry was banned from Quidditch that year, and thus it didn’t even appear in the book. How can she comment on it’s faithfulness to the book when she obviously hasn’t even read it?!? And if she knew anything about Quidditch, she would know that it’s a quite simple game, we’ve seen enough of it, and putting it into any future Harry Potter books and/or movies would be, quite simply, boring.
Don’t try to be an expert on stuff you know nothing about.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
That stupid lady was my wife. And she didn’t say “What is a Harry Potter story without Harry playing Quidditch?” Ron plays Quidditch in the book, doesn’t he, even though Harry is banned? And doesn’t Ron actually win the tournament in the book?
So, who’s the expert here? Certainly not me. I’ve never read any of the books.
I think it’s fair to say that Jenn might have criticized the movie more for what it wasn’t than for what it was; but I think you’ve done the same with her review.
Thanks for reading, though — and for the link!
July 28th, 2007 at 11:19 pm
Greg,
You are right in that quidditch was mentioned in the book, but not in the same way that it was in the previous one—people talk about what happened during the quidditch matches, so you know they happened, but you don’t get the play-by-play.
The point is, the Harry Potter series is about Harry Potter, and not the entire wizarding world. To fit 800 pages into one movie is absolutely impossible, and I feel the script writer and director did an excellent job in distilling it down to what was really important in the book.
For someone who’s not familiar with the previous movies or books, it’s very fast-paced, but again, masterfully cut into such a short time frame.
As for the “stupid” comment, you’re right, I was out of line.
-Andy
July 30th, 2007 at 10:12 am
Andy,
I appreciate your sense of humor, and I hope you appreciate mine!
I think you see that what this boils down to is a difference of opinion, not a question of expertise or knowledge — and that’s always what reviews are about: opinion.
As to Quidditch, specifically: why is it, do you think, that Rowling felt it necessary to even reference Quidditch in the book, given that Harry didn’t participate during that school year? Two possible answers, among others: that what happens to Ron is as integral to the story as what happens to Harry, or that Rowling knew that Quidditch pretty much IS integral to a Potter story, in the mind of the fans, and must be acknowledged in some way.
I agree with Jenn — and an awful lot of fans, and critics — that Yates and Goldenberg don’t have an awful lot of insight into what has made the Potter MOVIES successful. And movies are different than books. So while Phoenix may be a fine distillation of the book, it doesn’t work as well as the other movies (though technically it’s a superior movie).
And that’s an opinion — misguided though it may be from your perspective.