I hated Harry and the 1/2 blood prince

what a bunch of crap. I know the book is 700 pages long, and it's tough to turn that into a movie. i know the more love stuff you put in the better the suits think a movie will do. i know it's a business, i get all that.

but seriously? just making up new crap that wasn't in the book? really? why?

and having the charactors act out of charactor? what's the point in that?

save your money, go read the book.

I have not read or seen any of the Harvey Potters books or movies, but I seem to recall prior movies getting a lukewarm review, while this one has gotten good reviews...which is the opposite of what you are writing.

You are a renegade.

i'm a reader.


i didn't like movie#5, either.

clothier wrote:

i'm a reader.


i didn't like movie#5, either.

I read a few other comments here and there about the movie, and I see what you are saying. I, not being an enthusiast, might like the movie, but it isn't true to the book.

Gotcha.

There is always porn. Never have to worry about the book version...or a story for that matter.

Perhaps it is best explained in this Tribute to Porn Song (can't embed...sorry)

Personally, I'll wait for Angry Liberal's review.

clothier wrote:

what a bunch of crap. I know the book is 700 pages long, and it's tough to turn that into a movie. i know the more love stuff you put in the better the suits think a movie will do. i know it's a business, i get all that.

but seriously? just making up new crap that wasn't in the book? really? why?

and having the charactors act out of charactor? what's the point in that?

save your money, go read the book.

This is the same for all books made into movies. Why should HP be any different. Under the Tuscan Sun just used the title. That was it. It is amazing the butchering jobs they do.

There are exactly two movies that have done good with the original written material (and oddly they are both Steven King's work)
Stand By Me
and
The Shawshank Redemption

That's it folks.

Interview with a Vampire was a pretty good rendering, but I just could not get over the horribly bad casting. BAD.

The Goddess wrote:

There are exactly two movies that have done good with the original written material (and oddly they are both Steven King's work)
Stand By Me
and
The Shawshank Redemption

That's it folks.

How about the Godfather...and No Country for Old Men...and I am sure there are also some great porn films based on books, or perhaps leaflets.

I tried to read the Godfather a few years ago, and stopped about 5 pages in because it was screwing up the movie for me. I think this is one example of the film being much better than it's literary basis. There aren't many, but there are a few.

No Country for Old Men read more like a screenplay than a novel, and IMO was a hack effort to make some money by one of my absolute favorite writers. I thought All the Pretty Horses was a much better McCarthy adaptation to film, and a far superior book.

I also thought The Prestige from a few years back was greatly superior on film than the novel on which it was based.

Papillon was good, and faithful to the book. How can you go wrong with Hoffman, and McQueen though?

A-13, are there any PG or PG-13 porn films? If not Mr. C has not been exposed to the genre.

Oooo....good call on Papillon. I forgot about that one.

I still haven't seen The Prestige...mean to. I wanna know how they bring that book to film. Hard to imagine for me.

PS: I have read several books that read like the author was just hoping someone would pick it up and make a movie out of it (e.g. Sideways). Like he/she tried selling it as a screenplay and then turned it into a book to try to get it in the back door. Those don't count.

I expected more because JK Rowling says she has script control, and she says she makes them stick to the story. But i think she lost it in the last movie, and certainly no one who was a fan of the books would have OK'ed this piece of dreck.

The Goddess wrote:

try to get it in the back door

I'm pretty sure I saw that porn film but I don't think it was PG or PG-13.

it all comes back to jenna, doesn't it?

The Goddess wrote:

Oooo....good call on Papillon. I forgot about that one.

I still haven't seen The Prestige...mean to. I wanna know how they bring that book to film. Hard to imagine for me.

They dispense with the modern frame tale, and run it as a straight period piece. They still jump around a good bit in the time line of the story. It bears multiple viewings.

clothier wrote:

it all comes back to jenna, doesn't it?

Did you have to say "comes"?

laststandchili wrote:

The Goddess wrote:

Oooo....good call on Papillon. I forgot about that one.

I still haven't seen The Prestige...mean to. I wanna know how they bring that book to film. Hard to imagine for me.

They dispense with the modern frame tale, and run it as a straight period piece. They still jump around a good bit in the time line of the story. It bears multiple viewings.

Papillion...is that the one with George W Scott playing some General who likes tanks and rally large flags?

What is this reading that you guys speak of?

Is that like movies - but, with words?

Independent George wrote:

What is this reading that you guys speak of?

Is that like movies - but, with words?

The movies you watch don't have words?????!!!!!

The Goddess wrote:

Independent George wrote:

What is this reading that you guys speak of?

Is that like movies - but, with words?

The movies you watch don't have words?????!!!!!

or abbreviated version for people who like to get to the point...

clothier wrote:

i'm a reader.

I regret to say that I'm not a reader but I am curious about how the readers amongst us feel about these things:

pastrami-on-wry wrote:

clothier wrote:

i'm a reader.

I regret to say that I'm not a reader but I am curious about how the reader's amongst us feel about these things:

Seems a bit unwieldy for a PDA or a calculator.

What is it?

Agent 13 wrote:

pastrami-on-wry wrote:

clothier wrote:

i'm a reader.

I regret to say that I'm not a reader but I am curious about how the reader's amongst us feel about these things:

What is it?

I believe that is a well-manicured left hand of the female of the human species.

pastrami-on-wry wrote:

clothier wrote:

i'm a reader.

I regret to say that I'm not a reader but I am curious about how the readers amongst us feel about these things:

Meh.

I figured you'd say that since I would think that holding a book and turning the pages has become an important part of the entire reading experience.

It's probably something like the fact that I really miss looking at and reading an album cover. A CD cover just ain't the same. Plus it's much harder to roll a joint on a CD cover.

There's definitely something tactile about the book thing for me. Oddly, I'm thrilled to dispense with newspapers and zip around on the internets for news.

My receptionist digs her kindle, but then she's from the mid-west. There's a lot of life she hasn't seen.