Cool News
Alfonso Cuaron's HARRY POTTER & THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN teaser hits online!!!
Hey folks, Harry here... I really quite liked the last Harry Potter film, but I have to say... there's a texture to this teaser that I just love. Maybe it's that choral number... or Rickman in a dress... Or that hand on the windowsill or... the sight of Gary Oldman not as a dwarf... I'm not entirely sure what it is, but I like it. Now, will Harry and the Redheaded guy lay on their backs on diving boards and schuck their wands?
I'm sure that 100 people have probably sent this to you already, but the first teaser for Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is now online here:
Click here to Behold Cuaron's Magic!
There are a few other links at www.the-leaky-cauldron.org if that one doesn't work. Warner Bros. took it off their site after a couple hours, so the others might be pulled soon as well.
I hope this is of use to you.
Pam K. Nail
-
+ Expand All
-
It's a very sweet trailer; nice to see they aren't sugaring the book up for the little kiddies. I was a fan of the first two movies, personally, but having a real director behind this one is really showing.
I can't wait. This is my big event picture after ROTK. -
Man, I'm a loser. I can't wait for this movie.
-
THIS is the one I've been looking forward to. Book 3 leaps ahead of the first two, here's hoping the movie does too!
-
Impressive, I like how the teaser plays over the choir.....now what is "Something wicked this way come" from?
-
. . . but these movies only made my money because they made for meager filling from the "lord of the rings" flicks. not that i go through wizard withdrawls or anything.
-
It is the name of a fantasy/horror novel by Ray Bradbury.
-
This looks fantastic, and Michael Gambon doesn't look half bad. And the Dementors look like they're even more scary than the Ringwraiths. Oh man this is going to be great.
-
'Something wicked this way comes' is from Macbeth. Macbeth is the sequel to Gladiator.
-
dementors look cool.hope they're scary looking in the movie
-
Nov 13, 2003 12:37:30 AM CST
Man, check out that last shot of the Nazgul, I mean, ummm...Deme
by terry_1978
I like the tone of this one...extremely dark, not all happy go lucky like when they first started...'ol Harry's gonna be going all Jak II on Voldemort's arse this time around, after all he's been through it looks like.
-
I have read all the Harry Potter books, watched both movies and loved all of it. But while Harry Potter is great, there are a lot of HP fans that I absolutely despise. Namely those who consider it an absolute atrocity, blasphemy to see the HP movies without reading the books, yet don't hold themselves to the same standard when it comes to the Lord of the Rings. I know several people (HardCoreRocker, for one) that consider themselves cultured, cream-of-the-crop for having read Harry Potter but write off reading LOTR as nerdy. Sure they appreciate the source material, but they will not read it for themselves for no other reason than that they feel it is below them. Well listen here, you double-standard snobs: Shut up about your boy wizard and how no one should enjoy his adventures unless they have read the books. Go read The Tower Towers and Return of the King before December 15 or don't go to the Best Picture of the Year at all.
-
The writing in the clouds was ridiculously reminiscent of the Return of the King video game previews. I didnt remember Hogwarts with a choir.
-
I meant chorus. Whatever. singing children
-
I think Alfonso Cuaron is exactly what is needed to kickstart this series. Chris Columbus did a great job of translating the world of Harry Potter to the screen, but if I hadn't already grown to love the characters through the books, I just wouldn't have cared. And I really can't explain why. I mean, everyone did a fantastic job, from Alan Rickman, Richard Harris, Maggie Smith, John Hurt, Kenneth Branagh, and Robbie Coltrane to Emma Watson and Rupert Grint (I'm sorry, but Daniel Radcliffe is a bit too bland for me). (And, you know, listing those people, and knowing that this next movie has Gary Oldman, Michael Gambon, and Timothy Spall joining, you can't deny that these films have the greatest cast in modern cinema--yes, even greater than the "Lord of the Rings" films.) But, with all those great people, and all that fantastic scenery, the previous two films just did absolutely nothing for me. I was not moved at all, except to appreciation or mild chuckles at some bit of cleverness. I never cared for the characters and I never felt any danger or drama at all. (And it's not because I'm comparing it to the books; I read the "Lord of the Rings" books and I quite literally shake with anticipation for the next movie.) (Actually, that brings up another point: perhaps the "Lord of the Rings" films work so well because they are separate entities from the books. Many things were cut, many were changed, but always to tell the STORY in another medium. What works in one medium doesn't neccessarily work in another. And that's where the "Harry Potter" films go wrong. They are absolutely unwilling or unallowed to change anything, so they become "Masterpiece Theatre" adaptations: the books on screen, scene for scene, word for word. How good would those films be if they actually stopped, allowed some time to breathe and learn more about the characters, instead of rushing to the next novelistic set piece. As it is, it seems like it panders (in an ultra-slick way) to the ten-year-olds who read the book: this happens and this happens and then this happens, and, oh, we mustn't forget the Rememberall or the clock in the Weasleys' house. (After watching the first one, my twelve-year-old sister griped that they didn't include everything from the book!) They have one of the greatest screenwriters in the business, Steve Kloves ("Wonder Boys" and "Racing with the Moon"), making these films, and I have no idea why. These films are made in the pre-production office: artists submit drawings of every scene in the book, those scenes are filmed, and then everything gets trimmed to family-epic length of 150 minutes. They could have cut out a third of the stuff they left in, and it would have been the same empty film. But if they'd thrown in some real damn movie scenes in place of those cut ones, we really would have a new "Wizard of Oz" on our hands.) But, I digress (which is exactly what the films don't do). Chris Columbus, thank you for creating the setting, for establishing the world. Now, please take your place as executive producer. It's time to bring in a director with a real heart and soul, someone with something to say (let's see how much of him actually slips through Rowling's defenses). This teaser looks great, and while there's no way I can know that Cuaron succeeded until I've seen it, he's accomplished the feat of getting my blood flowing. Can he do the same for this franchise?
-
Never liked Chris Columbus' take on it.
-
Nov 13, 2003 1:39:55 AM CST
"By the pricking of my thumbs/something wicked this way comes"..
by gigaloff
...is actually a line from MacBeth, an obscure play by a little-known geek called Billy Shakespeare. Though not as respected as Bradbury, he does have a devoted fanbase.
-
I used to Harry Potter being a good warmup for LOTR. Pitty it wont make it in time. Looks good though...
-
Trailer looks alright, im afraid a sex scene is inevitable. yippee!
-
Nov 13, 2003 1:54:47 AM CST
Three minutes of Alfonso Cuaron has more artistry than five hour
by renata
So what's the firs thing Warner Bros. does? Replaces him.
-
I just read that this film also stars Julie Christie and Emma Thompson! Julie Chistie AND Emma Thompson! Has there ever been as respectable a cast as this? I wouldn't be surprised to see a computer-generated Laurence Olivier playing the Bloody Baron.
-
Do you know Cuaron was replaced by Newell? I love Cuaron's movies. I even though "A Little Princess" was art disguised as a kids film.
-
I meant to ask "Do you know WHY Cuaron was replaced by Newell." Apologies.
-
I thought the last potter was awful. Lets hope this is more like the first.
-
Thank you. That wanted poster made my day. Oldman is the coolest republican ever! Or is that the only cool republican? Anyway this could be his best movie since Lost in Space and Fifth Element ;) kisses
-
Look a bit 'ribbed for her pleasure'. Looks like WB are aiming for the adult market now.Get your Harry Potter Candle Dildos to FILL your stocking this year.
-
Agador: The official reason that Mike Newell is doing Goblet of Fire instead of Alfonso Cuar
-
Nov 13, 2003 4:22:41 AM CST
Book fan: Why the first two movies didn't work [and why this one
by hellious
Ok, so here I am, long long longtime reader of this site, and non-poster. I'm finally crossing over to the dark side. Why? Because of this goddamn teaser.
A word of explanation and Cover My Ass: I loved the ROTK trailer. I drooled, and then nearly stabbed the dweeb who made the mistake of trying to find a seat in the middle of it. But this, this, is trailer-fuckin-magic, or fuckin-magic-trailer, or however you want to fuckin it. This is what I was waiting for with this series.
You see, I'm a huge fan of the books. No, I don't still live with my parents. Yes, I do know what girls smell like. [deliciousness]. I've read The Classics, I've grokked The Hard Stuff, but I also believe that the best stuff often comes in disguise, as "children's books." Want a children's book? Go read Alice In Wonderland, or The Phantom Tollbooth, or A Wrinkle In Time. Go read the Narnia series again. Those are just great books, not just great childrens books. I feel the same way about the Harry Potter series.
Rowling has a way of writing her dialogue that doesn't make it seem forced, or trite. Her writing style lends itself to making the books very fast reads. I always feel that her characters are firing off these lines like normal kids do, right off the top of their heads. This is where the first two movies screwed the pooch in a big way, the second more than the first.
Ok, so here we go. As if that rambling mess above wasn't enough, I'm officially declaring this as the start point of How I Spent My Summer Vacation, or How/Why The First Two Movies Didn't Work. Right...now...or...now.
[Disclaimer: as a lover of the books, this will obviously be a comparison of the books to the movies. I totally understand the whole "But a movie needs to be different" argument, and I agree to a point, but the only convincing I need is the LOTR movies. Anyone who doesn't buy this can go screw.]
Movie 1:
Colombus got the design right. It felt "real", in terms of how the Potter world, or PW from now on, is portrayed. So...Columbus got the design right. And...well...the characters were pretty good. Ok, I'm being harsh. I actually like the first movie. [The funny thing is, the more I see the two films, the second film is a far better film, but is more dissatisfying from a book continuity perspective.] I think we can all agree that the story plods along, hits every major plotpoint in the book, and hits the saccharine ending on queue. The funniest thing about the ending was that it was right out of the book, but the book never made it feel like I was getting a Pixie-Stik enema. Besides that, it was/is a pretty good watch from a book fan perspective.
Movie 2:
Man, what the hell happened? Was it a better film in general? Yes. Was it a better Harry Potter film? Hell no. This was death by a thousand cuts. The devil is in the details, and they changed the frigging details for no good goddamn reason.
Why is Slytherin in every frigging class that Gryffindor is in? Is it really that hard to pay 20 different kids union scale for a classroom shot? I understand the whole "need to emphasize the division between Gryffindor and Slytherin" thing, but the only thing they've really accomplished is giving themselves major contiuity problems down the road.
Why did they turn such fun and quick dialogue into a goddamn funeral dirge? They tried so hard to make EVERY SINGLE LINE MEAN SO MUCH. That whole mudblood scene between Harry and Malfoy was straight out of an afternoon TV movie, most likely "My Dog Nailed Your Cat", or something of that ilk. When I read the book, I always have felt that the dialogue between Malfoy and Harry is spur of the moment, tip of the toungue insults that are flying back and forth. The film made it seem like the two of them are only allowed to see each other once every two weeks. "Oh, there you are Potter, here's the insult I've thought of for this fortnight". "Oh, how deliciously devilish Malfoy, what say I retort with THIS, eh?" Complete with camera zoom to 13 year old actor trying not to cry on camera. Hmm, maybe a little harsh, but you get the point.
Dobby sucked. I'm sorry, but he just sucked. It wasn't the character design, it was what they did with him. He should have been like a kitten on chrystal meth. He was more like a bovine on Vicodin.
Things That Rocked:
Kenneth - Rocked. Perfect casting. 'Nuff said.
Jason Isaacs - I CAN'T WAIT to see the later films with this guy. I know he always plays the bad guy, but Oh My Gentle Jesus, he was just totally fucking evil in this.
-The fact that it was Columbus' last take on the series. Don't get me wrong, I think he's done great things for the series. Like I said above, his design is spot on, but I think the movies require a different hand directing. It needs to be lighter, yet at the same time, harder and heavier. I mean, I've laughed more during the 5th book, which is most definitely the "darkest" than any of the others. Rowling has that gift of taking you to the lowest points, and then sticking you with a well timed joke, which makes you laugh even more. I thought Cuaron could be the guy for the job, but after seeing this trailer, He's the fucking man.
The design is still there, but it's, uhm, meatier, or chunkier, or something. That shot of Malfoy with the origami bird is fucking amazing. [They got lucky that kid grew up not-ugly.]Gary Oldman. Gary Goddamn-Sweet-Merciful-Crap Oldman. Crookshanks. The camera work. The camera work! Look at how Cuaron moves that thang! That's really what pushed me over the edge on this one. I had to watch it a few times, and then slo-mo it before I caught on. Go to the last quarter, to the shot of Dumbledore [I'm not going to break that role down to the actor, as it isn't fair to either of them. Suffice to say that Dumbledore is most definitely Dumbledore here] lighting the candle. There's two shots that come up, the one of McGonagall followed by the one of Harry with his wand out. I know we've seen rotating tracking shots before, but man, these just pop. The Hand. Need I say more?
Alright, I'm done drooling. For a first post, not bad. Anyone who agrees with me is welcome to reply. The rest of you better learn how to agree with me.
hellious -
Alfonso Cuaron's Y Tu Mama Tambien was great. There seems to be a new trend in Hollywood. Alejandro Gonzales for 21 grams, Cuaron for Harry potter, Gael Garcia Bernal assaulting the big screen with great Mexican movies and Salma's fantastic titties on Frida, Eva Mendes is hot...former California governor Pete Wilson must be pissed. FUCK HIM!, as long as we get some cool shit to watch. CHEERS Amigos!
-
Damn, she sure is growing up super fast...I'm talking about Harry Potter's female classmate. I wonder if we will see her in Playboy some day?
-
Good trailer. The Macbeth was used to excellent effect, as was the choir in general. I'm definitely curious to see how this turns out.
-
"Harry Potter" sucks! It's rediculously overrated, and nothing more than a destraction from so many other properties that are a million times better! Fuck "Harry Potter" up his sorry ass!
-
Oh yeah, fuck those fucking distractions up their fucking asses. Fuck.
-
Okay first of all the good:
The gothic look of the movie is wonderful, the Dementors are going to kick the LOTR Ring Wraiths asses. When Cuaron does creepy, spooky and gothic he is the king.
The bad:
Why put the cast in trendy modern clothing? As Louise Mingebach the costume designer for X-MEN 1 and X-MEN 2 warned it is always a mistake to do this as the movie will look dated in five years. The people who like Harry's hooded sweat top, in a few years time will be saying "that is so last season"
The Ugly:
Do I see the ugly head of Warner Bros greed? Schools are not in the habit of changing their uniforms every couple of years (British soccer teams do this). Could the changes in the Hogwarts uniform and Quidditch uniform (not seen)be a cunning plan to rip-off fans "Mommy I want the new Harry Potter robe!"
-
Cuaron has more style in his little finger than Chris Columbus.
-
Can't wait for this, looks excellent!
-
I've been indifferent to both the books and the films in this series, but its good to see the filmmaking mature beyond the kiddie stages of the first two. And Oldman looks fun, subtlety of a sledgehammer, as usual....
-
I love how it looks, but I can't stand the music...I'm dreading to hear what Williams has overcooked up this time. Yes, this one will rock, the book is far better than the first two and we don't have a hack for a director. The difference between this and LOTR is that in this case the books have been far better, with LotR it's the other way around. Plus the HP books can be read in a tenth the time of the LotR books, so there's no excuse. About the clothes...if you notice, they're still wearing the same robes in school. It's just that more of 3 takes place outside of school, where they can wear whatever they want (which is ordinary present day clothes). Now if they just resisted the temptation to change things for no particular reason like the last two...
-
I love how it looks, but I can't stand the music...I'm dreading to hear what Williams has overcooked up this time. Yes, this one will rock, the book is far better than the first two and we don't have a hack for a director. The difference between this and LOTR is that in this case the books have been far better, with LotR it's the other way around. Plus the HP books can be read in a tenth the time of the LotR books, so there's no excuse. About the clothes...if you notice, they're still wearing the same robes in school. It's just that more of 3 takes place outside of school, where they can wear whatever they want (which is ordinary present day clothes). Now if they just resisted the temptation to change things for no particular reason like the last two...
-
The Disney movie titled, "Something Wicked This Way Comes," which scared the crap out of a wee little Ockham when it first came out. Re: HP and the new trailer, it should be a rather foregone conclusion that this movie (and sequels, if any) will have a much darker tone since the source material really takes on a different character with the third book. Not sure if we will be able to point out differences solely attributable to the different directors, though I'm sure TBs will certainly try.
-
This little punk is morphing into the ultimate villain. He's turning into Johnny from The Karate Kid.
-
Nov 13, 2003 4:19:45 PM CST
" you can't deny that these films have the greatest cast in mode
by gypsytrobot
HAHAHAHAHA! HAHAHA! DE-NIED! Sorry, although I am a HP fan, and I have criticized PJ for some of his bad decisions, I still can't sit idly by and let someone make a statement like that. I'll let someone else do a complete breakdown, but I'll start at the top - either of our two wizards from LotR out-wizard the original Dumbledore by several orders of magnitude, and judging by the (admittedly brief) clip, they'll kick the new Dumbledore's ass as well. That's even with the breakdancing taken into account.
-
Nov 13, 2003 6:19:34 PM CST
All the tracking shots look gorgeous--my favorite is the winter
by lance rock
-
Nov 13, 2003 6:47:38 PM CST
Actually, that one shot where Ron and Hermione stare off at the
by ribbons
Speaking of tracking shots and all. Come on, I know somebody out there was thinking the same thing.
-
Is it just me or does the Quicktime version have horrible lines all over it? I presume this is some poor attempt at watermarking it. Why? Who knows.
-
I would've liked a little peek at Lupin's werewolf transformation, though.
-
Nov 13, 2003 7:31:17 PM CST
That trailer was fuckin nails and the Oldman/Black poster was fr
by tall_boy
nuff said.
-
Looks cool, though. Cuaron can direct circles around that hackmeister Columbus, so it has the potential to be good.
-
http://pdl.warnerbros.com/harrypotter/us/med/azkaban/azk_tlr1_500.mov
-
Nov 13, 2003 10:30:31 PM CST
Having enjoyed the last two, and being that this is the best boo
by smeg for brains
... I was a little worried about the film version. Not too much, but just concerned that with a new director, the kids getting older, and a more complex story anything could happen, and it might not turn out good. This trailer was AMAZING. If it is any true indication of what this film will be like I think it is going to be pretty darn amazing.
-
I can't hear the trailer cause my speaker doesn't work! It still ruled though.
-
He'll direct your fucking head off if you don't. First two movies were terrific. Trailer looks awesome. LOTR sucks. Star Wars 4eva, bitches.
-
Nov 14, 2003 12:16:52 AM CST
Quicktime "watermark," Harry Potter III (general rant)
by chasesequence
It's called poorly compressed -- blame the person who made the digital file, not Apple. Learn a little something about the technology before you bitch about something that's totally not its fault. That's like blaming Faber Castell for being someone being a shitty artist. As for Harry Potter, the first one bored the fuck out of me after forty minutes, so I walked out -- and I love the books! They're not "overrated," they're just children's books, for God's sake, and they're pretty funny -- that's all they're trying to be. If you want to complain about authors being overrated, why don't you read something that's targeted at your own AGE group. Now, if the movie conquers the major problem I had with Book 3 (namely, that right after the climax, there's a few chapters of way-too-much-talking that could've very easily been edited back into the earlier chapters to build some serious excitement), I might actually watch this one all the way through.
-
Great point...if you are an adult, you have to resist the urge to judge kiddie movies on adult terms. Judging a Harry Potter film is one small step above judging a Barney movie...we aren't the intended audience. Sure some kiddie movies are entertaining for adults, but most are not.
-
What is this? Harry Potter and the Talkback of Hand-relief? The first was ok, but the 2nd made me fall asleep in the Cinema. I vowed never to see another Potter after that snore-fest and this isn't going to change my mind. Unless, of course, Coolio gets hired for Dumbledore - that guy's just tragic.
-
The school tie and robes have been changed (the robe now has a colour on the inside lining).
In the books and other two movies when visiting Diagon Alley they dress like wizards (robes and cloaks) Cuaron has them in trendy muggle clothing when visiting Hogsmeade. A message for Cuaron, Hogsmeade is a wizard village not a muggle village. -
No balls to go against big daddy Lord of the Rings hu? Pushed out of the Christmas spot like little bioatches! The trailer was nice and all...
-
This has nothing to do with LOTR. The first two HP movies were made practically back to back, and it was decided that the kids get a six month breather between the second and third one.Most of the main characters are minors and the law demands that they go to school. Add to that a new director, a more complicated storyline,and the amount of post production time necessary to do the effects, it would have been impossible to crank out three films in three years. Besides neither film has taken any business away from the other, and since Warners owns New Line, they are hardly in any competition. Personally, I think Christmastime is the perfect time to release these films, but that would have left them holding this one until next year, so I think all in all they made the right decision.
-
Ya know, Fortune'sFool, those candles aren't ribbed. Unless I miss my guess, that scene takes place when Harry is practicing defending himself against the dementors, and happens in the Defense Against Dark Arts classroom. The candles are molded to look like sections of spinal column.
-
...so finally a decent director gets his mitts on the most powerful brand of the past decade. But will the law of diminishing returns hit home? Will people dissapointed by the C grade direction of Columbus wait for the DVD...?
-
She's hot - I don't care how old she is. Can't wait until she turns 18, when hopefully she'll be starring in Harry Pop-her and the Chamber of Secretions.
-
i really wish my crush on emma watson felt more ... umm ... legal
-
i remember early on there was a draft that had this whole world set up at beverly hills high - abercrombie robes, dumbledor was black, draco was a super rich producers son, etc. im actually kinda surprised that warners didnt go that route considering their recent past with creative decisions.
-
That was hysterical, you guys. =D
-
cool shot and all, but it really reminds me of the shot at the beginning of Moulin Rouge when the camera takes us through the miniature of Montmartre, with the druggy Bohemian standing on the left... you know, the colors, the camera motion... oh forget it.
-
Nov 14, 2003 5:33:18 PM CST
"Cuaron has them in trendy muggle clothing when visiting Hogsmea
by minderbinder
The kids are mostly out of uniform when they're not in school. Harry wears muggle clothing in Diagon Alley, on the train, when Wood teaches him Quidditch, when he sneaks out to the library, when he's reading Riddle's diary, when he goes into the forest looking for Aragog. The kids are in street clothes all the time in the books and both movies, why are you just noticing it in this trailer?
-
Nov 14, 2003 10:08:46 PM CST
Looks great... Even if the kids are aging too fast to keep up wi
by holly_wight
They got a great many things right. Crookshanks looks just as I'd pictured, and the dementor's hand was pretty creepy. Gary Oldman seems to fit the role very well, and the new Dumbledore doesn't seem to be missing a beat... In fact, though Harris was an amazing actor, this new Dumbledore may be perfect for the darker direction of the later books. I'm pleased. Hopefully, they can get all the books translated into film before the kids all look like their 30.
-
Minor typo. I'm not that poor at English. Forgive me.
-
Nov 14, 2003 10:14:34 PM CST
Don't worry about Emily "Hermione" Watson making you randy, dear
by holly_wight
She gets my blood pumping, too. Quite a pretty little thing, isn't she? Though I still think that Alexa Vega from Spy Kids is on the fast track to being hot as hell.
-
Nov 15, 2003 1:31:54 AM CST
I can't wait until Emma Watson turns 18 so that she can become o
by ribbons
Yeah, I'm just counting the days. Gotta love the allure of "transformation," eh?
-
Watch the previous two movies, see anyone in modern trendy clothing in the Diagon Alley scenes?
1. Harry in the first movie before he has bought any wizard clothing.
2. Mr and Mrs Granger, Hermione's muggle parents inthe second movie.
You will no doubt notice that when Harry and the Weasley's visit Diagon Alley they all wear cloaks. They then meet Hermione in a cloak and then Draco in a cloak. In the previous movies they only wore muggle clothing very casually not socially. Even then the muggle clothing (they wore) did not belong to any particular time. Cuaron has them prancing around Hogsmeade in the actors own up-to-date trendy clothing. This does contradict the books where JKR clearly states they dress in robes and cloaks. It also contradicts Columbus' movies where he respected JKR's vision and made sure to avoid having people wander about Diagon Alley in modern clothing. Watch the X-MEN 2 DVD where Louise Mingebach the costume designer warns about having the cast of a movie dress in too fashionable clothing as it dates a movie. -
Alfonso Cuaron has admitted to giving POA a more contemporary look. Columbus would never have had student witches and wizards visiting an all-wizard village without a LEAST wearing cloaks. Some how I do not imagine kids next Halloween deciding to dump cloaks for Cuaron's "wizard look" trendy hooded sweat tops when they go trick or treating. So Cuaron has deviated from the previous movies. However we heterosexual males should all look on the bright side. Emma Watson (Hermione) is getting older, she will soon be 16 which is legal in the UK. Do we guys really want her and other female characters like Cho Chang, Pavati Patil, Padma Patil, Ginny Weasley, Fleur Delacaur and Luna Lovegood to be wearing boring cloaks and robes. Wouldn't we all rather they dress like typical 16+ teenage girls out on the town e.g wear very little. Lets face it long cloaks and robes do not show much.
-
Some people wonder why I am so set against Cuaron dumping the robes for the Hogsmeade trips. Simply read some of the above posts.
-
Alfonso Cuaron is moving the HP movies from kiddies to teenager movies. JKR's robes and cloaks just don't fit in with a teenager movie. It is hard to lust after 16+ girls if they are covered from head to foot in long black robes and cloaks. This isn't an Islamic movie, lets see their bodies.
-
Nov 15, 2003 10:19:52 AM CST
"Watch the previous two movies, see anyone in modern trendy clot
by minderbinder
Did you even read my post? There are MANY parts of the books and first two movies where the kids are running around in "muggle" clothing. Even INSIDE THE SCHOOL. I guess you just choose to ignore those? I'd assume the main reason the clothes look a little different is probably as kids go from ten year olds to teenagers, they're more likely to buy their own clothes instead of mom picking them out. Look at the books - in the latest, an illustration shows Harry and Cho at Hogsmeade in muggle clothes. If you really want to insist you're right, the solution is obvious: just quote us a line from one of the books that says the kids wear robes/cloaks! I patiently await your failure to find one.
-
No offense guys, but I think the Ringers do a better job of handling less trifling indiscretions. This clothing is no more "trendy" than the clothing in X2's museum scene. Perhaps it will make the film look slightly dated, but it's not like they're wearing bellbottoms here.
-
Well, I can't agree more. We need to see more sex in the Harry Potter series! They're TEENAGERS for goshsakes! They'd be humping like wombats in the real world! I know that if I were one of Hermione or Ginny's classmates, I'd be sneaking off to the darker corners of the girls' dormitory with them to have some fun, or at least flirting heavily. Ooh, redheads are fun! You can't stop redheads from thinking about sex. It's impossible. I promise you Ginny would be getting around.
-
...are sick. She's **13** for crying out loud! She's a KID! Someone said she's 16, but that's incorrect -- she was born in April 1990. She's 13. That's it -- 13. You all are drooling over a child, and that's pretty disgusting.
-
Alfonso Cuaron has such a sharp visual style, and you can already see it rubbing off on this one. Chris Columbus made everything too brown for my tastes, if that makes any sense. Cuaron's palette seems wider in this preview.
-
And yes, she was born in April of 1990, which makes her almost 14. Now I don't know about other, but when I was 14, I was pretty sexually aware. So it's not *ghastly* that anybody sees her as attractive or desirable. She's a young woman, and she's very pretty, and I still contend that they are teenagers and wouldn't be so damnably chaste.
-
She's beautiful. I'm 28. How's that?
-
BOOK 3 CH 10
"On the Saturday morning of the Hogsmeade trip, Harry bid goodbye to Ron and Hermione, who were wrapped in CLOAKS and scarves..."
"The map went blank at once. He (Harry) folded it carefully, tucked it inside his ROBES...."
CH 14
"Harry seized the back of Ron's ROBES to stop him leaping on Malfoy"
BOOK 4 CH19 (ANOTHER HOGSMEADE VISIT)
"Ernie Macmillan and Hannah Abbott were swapping Chocolate Frog cards at a table, both of them sporting Support Cedric Diggory badges on their CLOAKS"
BOOK 5 CH16
"Harry watched numbly as the large chattering group took their beers from Fred and rummaged in their ROBES to find coins"
Is that good enough for you Minderbinder?
-
The artwork in book 5 showing Harry and Cho in muggle clothing is in the US editions of the books NOT the UK editions.
I do not dispute that in the previous movies they sometimes wore muggle clothing, however they only did this in very casual moments i.e. Harry and Ron playing a game of chess or sneaking about after hours under the invisibility cloak. There is a major difference between how you might dress sneaking about after lights out under an invisibility cloak and visiting a all-wizard village.
Why should the students dress like muggles when visiting Hogsmeade an all-wizard village?
Isn't it going to look strange that the people of Hogsmeade will be dressed in wizard and witches clothing while the students show off the latest muggle fashions? -
Nov 16, 2003 1:58:05 PM CST
All you pedophiles masturbating over Emma Watson shut the fuck u
by avon
you dirty, old, sick fucks. Oh and get a life by the way.
-
April 1990 makes her 13 1/2, not 14. But rather than quibbling over a half-year, let's get back to the main point -- she's a child. I don't care if she's "sexually aware," as someone said. She's a child, and anyone who wants to have sex with a 13-year-old and is NOT a young teenager is, by definition, pedophiliac. Saying she's beautiful is one thing -- kids can possess beauty. Talking about masturbating to her photo, though, is something else entirely, and more than a little disturbing. My daughter is a beautiful child -- but if anyone even remotely considered her sexy at her age, I'd never let them around her or any of my children, for that matter. Get some therapy, guys -- you've got some serious issues if Hermione, at this age, is someone you consider an acceptable sexual fantasy.
-
If you're referring to me referring to masturbation in my post, I hope you realize that I was just joking and would never think about coveting young girls. It is sick, and I was doing an exaggeration of it. Kind of inappropriate, yes, but essentially the same thing you're doing right now.
-
I just said that when I was her age, I was already having sex. Most girls do lose their virginity around 13-16 years old, which is only natural since most girls reach puberty a few years before boys. In the old days she would be considered an old maid if she hadn't had a husband and baby by the time she was 17. The 1950's saw a change to that ideal, and turned sex into a "bad" thing that you weren't supposed to do until you were too old to appreciate it. I'm glad I experimented as a youngster, and I'm saying that if J.K. wanted to be realistic she'd have Hermione at least doing some heavy flirting and fantasizing, and honestly- whether you like the imagery or not in relation to your darling daughter- she'd probably lose her virginity before she turned 15, and the most likely partner would be a boy about 5 years her senior. Sorry if the statistics scare you, but that's how it is for girls, unless they are made to be so afraid that Jesus will throw them in a lake of fire that they become frigid and unhappy with their sexual identity. Hey- Girls have to deal with some of these older sickos who are into girls who are WAY too young for them, but is a 28-year-old guy and a 14-year-old girl being together any different from the examples we see in Hollywood and the business world, where we see 50-year-old guys dating 20-year-old women? I wonder why the age difference is so horrible when a girl is under 18, but suddenly when she hits 18 years old it's OK if some 40-year-old is schtupping her. I can list a ton of famous couples and movies where the women are vastly younger than the man, and I don't see any of you complaining about THAT. The women in those relationships are no more sexually mature than they were when they were 14 years old, so what's the problem? I think it comes down to white, god-fearing men thinking that teenage girls are all just too stupid to "understand" what they're doing, so you bravely step in and "protect" them from having sex- Only one of the most enjoyable, satisfying, wonderful things a human can do with their body- even though you know DAMN WELL that when you were in your 20's you'd have had no problems with schtupping a 16-year-old in a catholic school girl uniform. Hypocrisy be damned, eh? Why do people insist on "protecting" other humans from sex? You're NOT DOING ANYBODY ANY FAVORS! By the by- "Pedophilia" is defined as having sex with a child. I wasn't a child when I was pushing 14. I was a adult according to my body, and the fact that I became sexually mature. Anyone who has reached the point of puberty can not be called a "child", and I think it's damned insulting to make someone act like a child (i.e. not engage in an activity that their body says they are ready to engage in) when they are clearly no longer in that category from nature's point of view. Being attracted to a 10-year old is pedophilia. Being attracted to a 14-year-old isn't. I don't recommend that a 30-year-old man go out and get himself a 14-year-old girlfriend, but I'm saying it's not -by definition- pedophilia. It's illegal (because of the stupid American laws that "protect" sexually-mature people from having concentual sex), but it's not pedophelia. This is all just my opinion, but I beg you to please not lump me in with maturbating boys. A woman can apprecate beauty without being committed to an act of self-abuse.
-
Nov 16, 2003 6:40:48 PM CST
To hell with all this talk of sexy fourteen-year-olds. . . Let's
by uncle stan
-
"Something wicked this way comes" is from the book by Ray Bradbury - but that author got the name for his book from a line said by a WITCH in Shakespeare's MACBETH. Doesn't anyone remember the witches' "Double Double Toil & Trouble" number? come on now people...
-
hokeyboy nice sharp jab lmao
Who should Bradbury sue?
Shakespeare, you illiterate dipshit?
NewYorkKid
rivalry for HP is He Who Must Not Be Named which will be the title bout. DM is up to book five an exceptional sparring partner.
Holly, with aids, abortion used for birth control, irresponsible people raising children, etc. there are a lot of people, male and female of every age, including my generation (mid 30's), people older, and last but not least younger that should not be sexually active. The ones here obsessing over Emma Watson are prime examples of this group. Relations of any type are hard, a physical relationship is the hardest. Any person in a physical relationship should be both in it for the other. If you are having physical relations just for yourself, or just for the other person you will make mistakes that could be costly, if someone is physical with someone because of outside influence (peer pressure, every body does it, etc) they really need a good friend, parent, or professional help. The poster above, I hope considers his kids people and will discuss all their issues with them, he definately cares about them, and d**** the rest, all good animals are protective of the ones close to them, unfortunately I can see times where the so called lower species are better at it than humans. If you currently, or ever have children I hope you treat them well, and put them above all others, there is no reason they should learn everything on their own. I do not know you, but I find it very scary that you believe all 14-16 year olds are exactly like you were. Maybe some should have, definately most should not be, the former is quite unsettling. I can personnaly name people my age, older, living, and dead who are not, never were, and quite possibly will never be capable of the intimacy, maturity, thoughtfulness, and RESPONSIBILITY of a physical relationship. You can scare me even more by saying you have never met, and god or whatever you respect forbid actually repeat or continue a physical relation with someone who will not consider the 4 aspects mentioned above. -
No matter how overwhelming the statistics, it's human nature (or at least a fundamental truth of society) that people want to preserve the innocence perceived in things that move them. Case in point: Nicolas Cage's response to his daughter in 'Matchstick Men.' Anyway, attractive or not, most people wouldn't see "what? She might as well show a little skin; in this world, EVERYONE's getting into bed with older, father figures!" Either you have greater powers of psychological dissociation than I, don't give a damn about the innocence of vulnerable youths, or are more preoccupied with your libido than anything else, pal. And no, 26-year olds with 40-year olds is not the same thing as a man in bed with a girl, because they are still ostensibly learning about the world.
-
I'm a great fan of the books but I have not been a fan of the past two movies. Yes, they did a great job of recreating the events of the first two Harry Potter books, but that's about it. Rowling's narrative voice, a huge part of what makes those books popular (no matter what her critics say) was lost. The problem was Columbus didn't have a distinctive enough voice to replace it. Jackson's Lord of the Rings plays and feels abit differently than the books, as well it should. He's making movies, not cliff notes. He keeps to the spirit of the written word and relies on his own instincts to turn great books into great films. The Potter films haven't done that. They just cut and paste choice passages from the novel and plop them on celluloid. This guy can do it. He has his own vision and his own voice, and I trust he can make a great Potter film. No, there wasn't a children's choir in the book, but that just set the mood perfectly, did it not? Those who read the books know very well something wicked this way comes, and those who haven't know big things are on the horizon. It was his own addition to the story, but it worked. The third is arguably the best in the series, and I am actually looking forward to this film.
-
While I have a soft spot in my heart for GoF for a number of reasons ( a book which, because of its length, might wind up getting mangled on its way to celluloid), I enjoyed number three as well. I do have confidence that Cuaron can take over the film with confidence, although I think the "slavishness" with which the last crew just pasted events onto the big screen has been significantly overplayed. Kloves' screenplays are more subtle than they've received credit for, although yes, they have heretofore felt like Cliffs Notes of a book and not a movie experience in and of themselves.
-
I think emma watson is very attractive now that she has matured a little, obviously i wouldn't want to shag her because she's 14 and it would be weird to shag a 14 year old at my age, and it would also be weird to be shagging and to keep seeing Hermione from harry potters face with a look of sexual ecstacy(or not) it would spoil the books forever! :-)
please for all the people who think that considering emma watson attractive is perverted and weird...wake up...It really doesn't mean we want to break out of our straight jackets, smash down the doors of our padded cells, hunt down young emma and destroy her innocence forever, we'll probably save that till she's 18 BA-DUM-DUM CHHHHHH!! -
Umm....is there much more to broach on this topic? I liked it, save Pam Ferris's balloon Marge, which looks a little embarrassing. Oh, and here's hoping Malfoy's voice isn't three octaves lower and his height two inches greater at the BEGINNING of the film this time. That one kind of distracted me last time around. Actually, I had a lot of stuff I was going to say about the trailer, but it seems to have slipped from my consciousness. Oh well... you wanna talk about which pre-teens you'd like to shag?
-
If it comes back to my (that which I was going to say), I'll air it out. I suppose a "duh" is supposed to follow that one.
-
It is called "ephebophilia" when a person has a forbidden attraction to teenagers. And you're right Ribbons, a 26 year old woman having sex with a 40 year old woman is okay by societal standards. I think the point was that why is it okay when the girl is 18? How is that really any different than the girl being 14-17? Most 18 YO girls I have met in my life are no more physiologically or emotionally more mature than 14-17 year old girls. (Not that *I* condone this behaviour). Anyway, word on the set was that the hormones have started flowing.
This flick does look good so far though.
-
Last post on this, I swear:
http://www.ageofconsent.com/ageofconsent.htm
This give some perspective on the world view. -
Nov 18, 2003 1:17:09 AM CST
I especially love the fat frogs that bob their heads in rythm wi
by ribbons
Those cute little bastards made my day...several days ago.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 273 total posts 271 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 92 total posts 92 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 69 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 151 total posts 63 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 67 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 60 total posts 57 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 484 total posts 49 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 69 total posts 42 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 120 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 183 total posts 24 posts