Harry Potter [2]

Eldorion wrote:

Bluebottle wrote:Yeah.. do I even want to get into the details of this..?

I wouldn't recommend it except to people who already care about Harry Potter and are either completionists or want to form their own opinion since there has been a significant gulf between the overwhelmingly positive critical reviews and the majority fan response (at least among online fans).

It has some nice parts and some okay parts but on the whole I did not enjoy reading it. I thought the story depended heavily on contrivance and it lacked the richness and sense of depth that's always been one of the things I liked about Harry Potter. I'm sure actually seeing the play would go some way towards resolving this, though the relatively small cast and small number of things that happen would remain. (I say relative compared to the novels; I don't know much about plays but this appears to be a large and lavish production by theatrical standards, but I think it was inevitably gonna be thin compared to the richness a novel allows.) Scorpius was a pretty cool character but other than him, Albus, and Delphi most of the characters are established ones from the novels and I felt that much of the characterization there was inferior to what came before. I would have preferred a story that was less dependent on previous plots and characters, both because of my dislike of retcons and because it's more interesting to me than retreading old material.

Some of the dialogue (which Rowling appears to have had little to no involvement with) is pretty cringeworthy IMO but I've read other fan responses from people who liked it so

malickfan wrote:

Mrs Figg wrote:Hermione. Why? why did they feel the necessity? I would refuse to watch it just because of the pc idiot casting.

In fairness I don't think there's anything in the books that definitely confirms her as white

Radaghast wrote:I got HPCC for my birthday for some reason. I liked the books but I'm not  huge fan or anything.

Anyway, I was expecting good things from this one, given the glowing endorsement by Rowling on the book jacket. But, having read it, I can honestly say, without hyperbole, that it's the worst thing I've ever read I've seen it compared to the fan fiction project "My Immortal" which I haven't read but I've read a little about it and the comparison seems apt.

I don't care how good the play is. The script SUCKS. Are there any other ways I can emphasize that? I frankly can't believe Rowling put her name on this.

Mrs Figg wrote:its not the fact its a Black actor, its the fact of the pc revisionism that irks me. It just takes me out of the moment if for, you know, 10 years, Hermione has been White with bushy brown hair. You may as well make Harry Potter Chinese. why would you do that?

Mrs Figg wrote:  Daniel must be having a nostalgic moment, I can understand that, he spent most of his life as Harry. it must be tempting to go back to that world, Mind you I think a lot of us want to go back to that world that's why we read C-Child, but it looks like the magic has gone. haven't read it and I don't want to.

malickfan wrote:Yeah my initial reaction wasn't great, but I thought after a few weeks of mulling it over I'd have become more forgiving of its flaws...nope, if anything it seems even worse, it may well be a visually stunning, strongly acted play, but on paper the story reads like badly written, hollow, derivative and frankly, pointless, fan fiction, and the script isn't much better.

The best thing I can say about it is...at least it's killed the likelihood of another sequel...

It's not entirely clear how much of the story Rowling came up with but you do have to wonder if she was just in the right place and the right time when she came up with Potter, I've heard good things about her detective novels, but with every new detail or story she releases regarding Potter I just feel less and less interested, the seven books were fine the way they are, and unlike Tolkien, Rowling's World Building wasn't massively detailed or interesting...

Rotten Tomatoes editorial wrote:A few years ago, when Warner Bros first announced their plans to spinoff J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter franchise with Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, the plan (as the world knew it) was for there to be three movies, forming a new trilogy. Along the way, we also learned the release dates for those three films, which are for the first movie (next month, on November 18, 2016), the second (11/16/18), and the third (11/20/20). Well, just as Disney is planning on producing Marvel and Star Wars movies for the indefinite future, it is now looking like Warner Bros definitely has long-term plans for the “Potterverse” as well. This week, at a fan event in London, Warner Bros revealed that instead of just three Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, there will now be five.  Warner Bros did not reveal the release dates for the 4th and 5th films, but following the pattern of the first three films, it looks like they might be released in November of the years 2022 and 2024, just before Thanksgiving each of those years. Director David Yates also revealed that the second film, which will start production soon, will be set in “another global capital city” after the first film was set in New York City. (Though we should point out, New York City is not… a capital city. The capital of New York is Albany!) Eddie Redmayne will star in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them as wizard author Newt Scamander, and he is expected to also star in the four sequels.

Convincing the famously independent Ms. Rowling to dive back into film was a coup. “When I say he made ‘Fantastic Beasts’ happen, it isn’t P.R.-speak but the literal truth,” Ms. Rowling said in response to emailed questions. “We had one dinner, a follow-up telephone call, and then I got out the rough draft that I’d thought was going to be an interesting bit of memorabilia for my kids and started rewriting!”

Mrs Figg wrote:I used to think the HP books were literally magical.