The production team for the Harry Potter films has it rough. They're sitting on the rights to the best selling book series of all time, and they've made a series of highly successful adaptations of the first books in the series. But each book keeps getting longer, darker and more adult in tone. Meanwhile, their actors are ALSO getting more adult.
That's the first thing that struck me when watching Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. As the credits finish, the camera swoops down to eventually find Harry sitting on a swing in the park and the first thing I thought was "look how freaking OLD he's gotten!" Not that he's old, of course. But he's certainly not the fifteen year old you're expecting. He's too tall, too mature, for the role.
Fortunately, within minutes you forget about it. Partly, it's because all the REST of the 'kids' in the movie have grown up as well, so there's a consistency that makes it easier to accept the disconnect. But, more importantly, these young actors have made the characters their own. Daniel Radcliffe is the cinematic Harry Potter and the only thing more disconcerting than the 17 year old who's playing 15 would be to dump a new 15 year old in the role. Same with Hermione, Ron and all the rest of the young people in this film. It's also likely that this is going to be the film where this disconnect is most noticeable. They've all done a lot of maturing in the past couple of years and the difference between 15 and 17 is simply more dramatic than that between 17 and 19.
The other issue is, I think, a bigger one. And I'm not convinced they did the best job of addressing it this time around. I read recently that the director had worked to make this the shortest HP film yet, and all I've got to say is "good choice." One of the longest books in the series, and you opt for the shortest movie… does anyone else see the flaw here? Not that the films weren't capable of getting bloated and out of control, but it still sounds like a rather arbitrary (and rather nonsensical) goal.
Not that they didn't do an excellent job of realizing the world of Order of the Phoenix. Their production values are, as always, top notch, and the casting and creature creation is up to the rest of the series. Overall, they nailed the look and feel of the books. It's just the details that are missing. Literally.
I understand that they had to cut the book to fit a movie's running time, and that whole segments of the book were excised (sorry Ron, no Quidditch… Hermione, forget about those oppressed house elves). But by the time the movie wrapped up, I felt like I'd just seen the CliffsNotes version of the book. (This is, apparently, hardly a singular reaction, as I just read a letter in Entertainment Weekly referring to it as the Reader's Digest version of the film).
Throughout the film, major passages in the book are given mere moments to play out, then it's off to the races so we can get to that next moment and those cool spell effects and so on. The death of a main character happens so fast that you're hardly aware of the significance of that event till they talk about it a few scenes later. (To be honest, I remember thinking it got short shrift in the book, but at least you immediately understood what happened and why it was a big deal.)
Ultimately, while I enjoyed the movie, what it really made we want was to go back and reread the novel, to fill in all the gaps that were left in my memory. Ironic, since I've started referring to these books as mental cotton candy (the details fade from my memory almost as soon as I finish the book). I guess that's not such a bad thing, from JK Rowling's point of view. (What author is going to complain about someone leaving a movie and wanting to reread their book?) But I've got to wonder how the movie plays for those that haven't read the books. Are they left wondering what the big deal is? Without the substance that gives meaning to the events that take place, I've got to wonder why you'd care to go along for the ride.
I'm all for the producers making the movies lean enough to play in the theater. But an awareness of what you're cutting away to get there is essential. I just think they filleted this one a little too close to the bone. (Look, another restaurant metaphor! All those years of waiting tables are coming back to haunt me).
That's the first thing that struck me when watching Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. As the credits finish, the camera swoops down to eventually find Harry sitting on a swing in the park and the first thing I thought was "look how freaking OLD he's gotten!" Not that he's old, of course. But he's certainly not the fifteen year old you're expecting. He's too tall, too mature, for the role.
Fortunately, within minutes you forget about it. Partly, it's because all the REST of the 'kids' in the movie have grown up as well, so there's a consistency that makes it easier to accept the disconnect. But, more importantly, these young actors have made the characters their own. Daniel Radcliffe is the cinematic Harry Potter and the only thing more disconcerting than the 17 year old who's playing 15 would be to dump a new 15 year old in the role. Same with Hermione, Ron and all the rest of the young people in this film. It's also likely that this is going to be the film where this disconnect is most noticeable. They've all done a lot of maturing in the past couple of years and the difference between 15 and 17 is simply more dramatic than that between 17 and 19.
The other issue is, I think, a bigger one. And I'm not convinced they did the best job of addressing it this time around. I read recently that the director had worked to make this the shortest HP film yet, and all I've got to say is "good choice." One of the longest books in the series, and you opt for the shortest movie… does anyone else see the flaw here? Not that the films weren't capable of getting bloated and out of control, but it still sounds like a rather arbitrary (and rather nonsensical) goal.
Not that they didn't do an excellent job of realizing the world of Order of the Phoenix. Their production values are, as always, top notch, and the casting and creature creation is up to the rest of the series. Overall, they nailed the look and feel of the books. It's just the details that are missing. Literally.
I understand that they had to cut the book to fit a movie's running time, and that whole segments of the book were excised (sorry Ron, no Quidditch… Hermione, forget about those oppressed house elves). But by the time the movie wrapped up, I felt like I'd just seen the CliffsNotes version of the book. (This is, apparently, hardly a singular reaction, as I just read a letter in Entertainment Weekly referring to it as the Reader's Digest version of the film).
Throughout the film, major passages in the book are given mere moments to play out, then it's off to the races so we can get to that next moment and those cool spell effects and so on. The death of a main character happens so fast that you're hardly aware of the significance of that event till they talk about it a few scenes later. (To be honest, I remember thinking it got short shrift in the book, but at least you immediately understood what happened and why it was a big deal.)
Ultimately, while I enjoyed the movie, what it really made we want was to go back and reread the novel, to fill in all the gaps that were left in my memory. Ironic, since I've started referring to these books as mental cotton candy (the details fade from my memory almost as soon as I finish the book). I guess that's not such a bad thing, from JK Rowling's point of view. (What author is going to complain about someone leaving a movie and wanting to reread their book?) But I've got to wonder how the movie plays for those that haven't read the books. Are they left wondering what the big deal is? Without the substance that gives meaning to the events that take place, I've got to wonder why you'd care to go along for the ride.
I'm all for the producers making the movies lean enough to play in the theater. But an awareness of what you're cutting away to get there is essential. I just think they filleted this one a little too close to the bone. (Look, another restaurant metaphor! All those years of waiting tables are coming back to haunt me).
Comments
Nice take--I stop just shy of feeling concerned for those who haven't read the books when an overwhelming feeling of "it's their loss" pulls me back into my borderline misanthropic senses. It's sort of the same selfish way I feel when confronted with people who choose to not eat meat or seafood -- "Goody, more for me!"