DarthAve Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 I'm avoiding Book seven spoilers, the OotP movie I'm fine with... i mean i've already read the book. You read the book before you go see the movie? I never did that, I mean fully. I tried to get through Prizoner of Azkaban before the movie, but I threw up on my book. ...and yes, I think it was a sign. I haven't read another Harry Potter book or seen another Harry Potter movie since.
Samnmax221 Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 You read the book before you go see the movie? I never did that, I mean fully. I tried to get through Prizoner of Azkaban before the movie, but I threw up on my book. Thats what you get you ****ing H FREAK!
Fealiks Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 I despise books and movies that try to be as good as LoTR, but that just aren't! *slap* seriously Bollocks as in testicles? Does that mean Potter is, in fact, first class and excellent performed PORN? So for you first class porn is just.. testicles? I didn't think the book was that bad, as long as you keep in mind what it is. The author was only in his late teens/early twenties when he wrote it, so you can't really expect too much. I thought he did quite well. I mean, if I tried writing a fantasy novel I'd have probably given up by chapter two. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Carpet_People I never did that, I mean fully. I tried to get through Prizoner of Azkaban before the movie, but I threw up on my book. All of your posts in the harbour seem include memories of the expulsion of various bodily fluids of yours
Joshi Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Carpet_People One of the few Pratchett books I actually can't get through. I wasn't really trying though. You do have to remember, any copy of that book you get these days has been heavily edited by the adult Pratchett, but I guess kudos to him for getting published at the age of 17 (as apposed to the guy who wrote Eragon, who's parents had a publishing house or some such). You read the book before you go see the movie? Not as a rule, but HP just happens to be a series of books I enjoy reading. There are a good few hundred movies I've seen that are based on books I've never read.
DarthAve Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 All of your posts in the harbour seem include memories of the expulsion of various bodily fluids of yours Not this one. I remember used to being so into the Harry Potter stuff. Than I forgot about it and started noticing guys without magical powers.
DrMcCoy Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 Which just goes to show that she really doesn't know anything about movies. By the time the seventh movie comes out the majority of audiences (the majority being made up of non-fans and casual movie goers) will have forgotten about whatever chatacter was introduced here and would need to be introduced again anyway. I really don't give a rat's arse about Harry Potter, but I'm against dumbing stories down so just that stupid casual movies goers with an attention span rivaling that of a housefly get it...
itchythesamurai Posted June 29, 2007 Posted June 29, 2007 But what if that housefly is...Jeff Goldblum?!
itchythesamurai Posted July 1, 2007 Posted July 1, 2007 ^ Why do you have to be such an enabler to my compulsive gambling problem?!
DrPhil2501 Posted July 1, 2007 Posted July 1, 2007 ^ Because I find it somewhat amusing... hmmyesss...
Brighteyes Posted July 1, 2007 Posted July 1, 2007 One of the few Pratchett books I actually can't get through. I wasn't really trying though. You do have to remember, any copy of that book you get these days has been heavily edited by the adult Pratchett, but I guess kudos to him for getting published at the age of 17 QUOTE] Love his books, but everytime we meet we argue. I went through a very geeky phase of going to the discworld conventions and book signings and due to him bring such an arrogant self centred lispey smeghead we always end up fighting.
Fealiks Posted July 2, 2007 Posted July 2, 2007 You fought Pratchett? *drools* let me lick your mouth
Joshi Posted July 2, 2007 Posted July 2, 2007 Love his books, but everytime we meet we argue. I went through a very geeky phase of going to the discworld conventions and book signings and due to him bring such an arrogant self centred lispey smeghead we always end up fighting. Not wholy sure if I'd like to meet him in person, love his books, but I've seen interviews and well, he's a bit dissapointing compared to what I pictured in my head. Otherwise though, as far as his persona goes, I feel he's just able to speak his mind more than most people. I do have to ask, what did you argue about though? I really don't give a rat's arse about Harry Potter, but I'm against dumbing stories down so just that stupid casual movies goers with an attention span rivaling that of a housefly get it... I'm not talking about dumbing stories down, I'm talking about tightening up the plot and leaving anything out that's completely irrelevent to the main plot. Movie making's about balance of plot, storylines and characters, it's not about including your favorite scene from the book simply because you liked it. If you want a movie that's a page by page translation of the book then be prepared to go see a 6 hour movie at minimum.
DrMcCoy Posted July 2, 2007 Posted July 2, 2007 I'm not talking about dumbing stories down, I'm talking about tightening up the plot and leaving anything out that's completely irrelevent to the main plot. Then you've got a generic skeleton plot with lifeless characters. Bravo. If you want a movie that's a page by page translation of the book then be prepared to go see a 6 hour movie at minimum. You make it sounds as if 6 hour movies were a bad thing. Seriously, I'd really love to see 6+ hour movies. Gives it time to really get to know the setting, characters, etc.. Makes them seem to have a life outside the plot, makes it realistic.
Joshi Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 Then you've got a generic skeleton plot with lifeless characters. Bravo. You generally have about 2 to 3 storylines going at once in a movie. If you include things that are irrelivant to them, there's no point to it. You make it sounds as if 6 hour movies were a bad thing. Seriously, I'd really love to see 6+ hour movies. Gives it time to really get to know the setting, characters, etc.. Makes them seem to have a life outside the plot, makes it realistic. If you want all that read a book. Depending on the type of movie anything longer than about 2 and a half hours tends to tire people out and they lose interest. And yes, I know you're about to argue about people with short attention spans again, but then not everybody has a decent attention span. I personally am able to sit through an entire season of 24 in one sitting (that's 16 hours) without getting bored and yes, I could sit through a 6 hour movie, but only if it was engaging. Most movies longer than about 2 hours tend to just drag on for no reason. And making the movie seem real isn't as important as you think. Making it seem believeable and somewhat realistic is important, but actually real? Real life is boring. People go to the movies to get away from that.
DrPhil2501 Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 You fought Pratchett? *drools* let me lick your mouth Waaahh ! I'm seeing spots before my eyes...
Fealiks Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 I personally am able to sit through an entire season of 24 in one sitting (that's 16 hours) I thought the seasons were 24 hours long. Do the characters get eight hours of sleep or something?
Joshi Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 I thought the seasons were 24 hours long. Do the characters get eight hours of sleep or something? Take out the adverts and you have 40 minutes per episode. Not as realtime as we think.
Joshi Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 Not everyone likes it, personally I love it, but to each their own. For instance, I could never get into "Heroes", but apparently that's the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.