RT-UK Exclusive: Alfonso Cuaron talks Mexico and a Return to Harry Potter

Summary

BAFTA is putting the final preparations in place for BAFTA Goes to Mexico in association with ezylet.co.uk, a weekend of special Mexican events that starts tonight with a glitzy party and a celebration of the work of director Alfonso Cuaron. RT-UK caught up with Cuaron ahead of the celebrations to talk about Mexican filmmaking, keeping it in the family and, of course, the possibility of a return to the world of Harry Potter. Back to Article

Comments

CoUcH ToMaToE DoUgIe

Shawn Amoroso

you are completely and utterely wrong!!! i am surprised by you, usually you have better opinions than this. you can ask anyone, including this thread, and the majority of critics and potter fan alike agree that he made the best or nearly the best movie in the series! oh, by the way Rotten tomatoes gave Alfonso Cuaron's potter movie the HIGHEST CREAM OF THE CROP AT 90% AND has tied the highest freshness in the series!!!

Now, what do you say about hose undeniable facts?

Jul 28 - 12:38 AM

CoUcH ToMaToE DoUgIe

Shawn Amoroso

aknddon3, i'm talkin to you. sorry but this new system may hide the fact that i'm upset with you and just wanted to let you know that whatever number i may be am upset with incorrect comment, as you can see with my previous comment listing this very website's opinion of cuaron's potter movie. it was the best as numbers will tell you.

Jul 28 - 12:43 AM

aknddon3

andrew kruzel

Well to people who never read the books the movie is okay, but for us that have read the book we know that he messed up the second best book of the series. HE RUINED IT, HE SUCKED AND HE MADE A ****TY MOVIE. I want someone who is going to stick to the storyline and not leave out major parts because he is a retard.

Jul 28 - 01:24 AM

gonadz

Tim Goens

How was PoA totally different from the book?

The only thing I wish they had included, was to let everyone know the importance of Harry's patronus taking the form of a stag. I really don't know why it wasn't in there, but oh well.

Gimme Cuaron on DH over just about anyone, except maybe Del Toro, I wouldn't mind him doing it either.

Jul 28 - 12:49 AM

aknddon3

andrew kruzel

Well to people who never read the books the movie is okay, but for us that have read the book we know that he messed up the second best book of the series. HE RUINED IT, HE SUCKED AND HE MADE A ****TY MOVIE. I want someone who is going to stick to the storyline and not leave out major parts because he is a retard.

Jul 28 - 01:24 AM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

If you're talking about leaving out an explanation of Mooney, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs then all directors in the series are guilty of that and I think Cuaron did the best job of at least giving a nod to the people who had read the book in that respect. The others just seem to assume you got it. At least Cuaron directed your attention to that aspect of the Marauders map as kindof a wink wink to the fans.

Jul 28 - 03:26 AM

pom_pom288

Matt Reynolds

I do agree that POA was probably the easiest of the books to adapt into film... but the overall tone was quinessential Cuaron.

I thought Yates did the best job possible in adapting OoTP, considering its the least "cinematic" of the novels with lots of dialogue and preparedness for the final showdown.

Jul 28 - 07:09 AM

gonadz

Tim Goens

You still haven't told me how it sucked and was totally different. I know, "HE RUINED IT, HE SUCKED AND MADE A ****TY MOVIE," is a compelling arguement, but I want to know exactly what you are talking about.

Jul 28 - 09:08 AM

aknddon3

andrew kruzel

1. He left out Dumbledores speech about how Wormtail owes harry a life debt, which is important in the last book.

2. He left out major parts about the four friends and never talked about the who moony, padfoot, prongs thing.

3. He never talked about the signifance of Harrys patronus.

4. In the book, Harry receives presents for his birthday while still at the Dursleys. He receives The Monster Book of Monsters from Hagrid, a broom tuning kit from Hermione, and a sneak-o-scope from Ron. In the movie, there is no mention of his birthday and he receives all his school books while at the Leaky Cauldron.

5. In the book, Harry stays for a week in Diagon Alley and purchases his school supplies. In the movie, he stays only for a day.

6. In the book, when he blows up Aunt Marge she floats to the top of the ceiling and gets stuck. In the movie, Marge floats out the patio door and into the air.

7. In the book, when the Knight Bus is about to hit something, the object moves out of the way, including trees, mailboxes, and telephone booths. In the movie, the bus must avoid hitting objects by swerving, stopping, magically narrowing, or slowing time down.

8. In the book, Harry boards the Knight Bus and states that his name is Neville Longbottom. In the movie, he does not give his name.

9. In the book, Hermione purchases Crookshanks from a magical petshop in Diagon Alley. In the movie, when Hermione is first seen she already has Crookshanks.

10. In the book, during the quidditch match, Harry sees The Grim in the stands, but in the movie he sees a cloud shaped like The Grim.

11. In the book, after Harry finds out Sirius Black "betrayed" his parents, Harry, Ron and Hermione are too stunned to move. In the movie, an irate Harry runs to the shrieking shack and shouts "I hope he finds me. Because when he does I'm gonna be ready. When he does, I'm gonna kill him."

12. In the book, people get past the Whomping Willow by touching a knot that freezes it. In the film, Sirius (as a dog) drags Ron into the Whomping Willow, avoiding its branches, with Harry and Hermione following suit. Lupin meanwhile uses an Immobilizing Charm on it and Snape sneaks after him while it's still deactivated.

13. In the film, Lupin reminisces about Lily Potter's good qualities to Harry, saying she was an 'uncommonly kind' woman and could see the beauty in someone even if the person could not see it themselves.

14. In the book, Harry, Ron,and Hermione all disarm Snape. In the movie, only Harry performs the Disarming Charm.

15. In the book, Harry receives the firebolt as an anonymous Christmas gift. Hermione thinks its from Black and is cursed, so she tells McGonagall who confiscates it for testing, and then both Harry and Ron get mad at Hermione. Harry gets it back in time for the Quidditch Cup. In the movie, Harry receives the firebolt at the end of the film and there is no mention of the Quidditch Cup.

So you want more loser?

Notice how the only people who like him are the ones that never read the book. He would ruin the movie and the hack director Del Toro would ruin it too like he did for Blade 2 and Hellboy.

Jul 28 - 01:57 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

OK< You've obviously thought this out and it's important to you, BUT...

1. He implies that Wormtail feels remorse and it's addressed in later movies that he only works for Voldemort out of fear, so the life debt is actually a minor technicality unimportant in the greater scheme of things and easily remedied.

2. As has previously been stated neitehr does any other director. At least he bothers to have a secondary character read the names for people like you who've read the books as a nod to you.

3. I think the Patronus thing was implied by Harry mistaking himself for his father. That's what I got anyway.

4. None of his presents besides the moster book is significant and how he gets it is incosequential. Again minor details and in order not to make a 6 hour movie edits have to be made to all films regardless of their source material.

5. Who cares. Do we really need to see a week of Harry shopping for school supplies?

6. Again who cares? The image of her floating above Privet Drive is better anyway.

7. Again more visually dynamic.

8. Yet again who cares, what's the significance?

9. For the 4th time who cares, is it really important to see Hermione make the purchase. How does that benefit the movie. I love commerce as much as anyone, but it doesn't make for the most riveting scenes.

10. Again, more visually pleasing and was a good lead in to the Dementor attack.

11. Better dramatic effect and speeks better to the audience what he's feeling.

12. That one I'll give you, it could have been done the way the book says with little or no loss, but doesn't come off badly in the film either and was probably left in for the action value of playing tag with the Whomping Willow.

13. OK, it was a nice scene and is a good foreshadowing of a later plot line that becomes important in subsequent films. Whats the problem with it?

14. Probably done to silence the "Why doesn't Harry do anything crowd".

15. Lets be honest, all the quidditch was starting to lose it's coolness which is probably why it's been completely left out since. I think all the additional Quidditch scenes would have had the been there done that feel to them


It's cool that you know all these differences, but by and large they're all nitpicky things which if they have to cut things, and I think it's been established that you do, I'm glad they did those instead of leaving gaping plot holes like swapping characters/leaving characters out or Majorly obvious changes like all the students from Durmstrang being boys and girls from Beaubatants like they did in Goblet of Fire. With books this huge cuts have to be made and I don't think any of the cuts you mention prove any kind of point on the movies overall quality except that it wasn't a word for word scene for scene translation of the book, and to be honest who would want that anyway? Trying to outdo someones own imagination is a recipe for failure and would really only benefit those who hadn't read the books.

Jul 28 - 03:42 PM

Bane Of Anubis

C M

Not sure why you bother... Anyway, whether Cuaron messed it up or not (I, personally, think the tone was darker than it should have been) book 3 was by far the worst of the series (IMO) -- for this one reason (that I've harped on too many times, I know): the deus ex machina device of time travel -- which could be used in previous and subsequent books to solve any problem... It's a horrible plot device....

Book 5 was the most ponderous of the series, but 6 wasn't far behind (typical serial writing -- 600 pages of build up with 100 pages of payoff). I tend to be more critical than the average joe, I guess, but JKR is a good children's writer (strong plot, for the most part, good pacing, for the most part, good description, strong characterization -- probably her best attribute -- though overdone/overexploited at times), but by no means a great writer.

It baffles me that people have put her in the literary ranks of Tolkien and Lewis... Based on pure numbers, she blows them away, but based on literary merit, she's sorely lacking.

Ultimately, she got lucky (to the extent of her prodigious success) -- there are better books out there (by better, in this case, I mean mass market appeal better) -- she caught lightning in an earth-sized bottle...

Jul 29 - 12:03 PM

aknddon3

andrew kruzel

Have you read Lewis? I like him but his books are really not that well written, i mean they are good but really nothing special.

Jul 29 - 12:30 PM

Bane Of Anubis

C M

The Screwtape Letters are pretty slick in terms of style... Narnia, in terms of children's writing, superior to anything by JKR... (in writing, if not, necessarily in plot -- though CSL's works were more inventive IMO).

Jul 29 - 02:17 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

Oh and the most glaring omission for me is the absence of Dobby from all but the second film. many subsequent plot lines were lost by his omission.

Jul 28 - 03:44 PM

CoUcH ToMaToE DoUgIe

Shawn Amoroso

woah, i guess you have a good point, i guess had forgotten all the things missing from the book. still, i was just reacting it to as a great movie, not adaptation. i guess having a harry potter movie that is both an excellent film and adaptation is something almost impossible to achieve. so i guess you are right when it comes to faithfully adapting to the book but i still loved the film as is and its saying something he can make a great film without faithfully sticking to the book. But I guess the great question willl remain in the end: what do you want- A GREAT FILM, POOR ADAPTATION OR A GREAT ADAPTATION, POOR FILM. i don't know its one tough cookie of a problem to crack.

Jul 28 - 09:39 PM

Mr. Kong

Sam jacobs

A good sum of that is nitpicky, aknddon.

1. He left out Dumbledores speech about how Wormtail owes harry a life debt, which is important in the last book.

Alright, that's understandable.

2. He left out major parts about the four friends and never talked about the who moony, padfoot, prongs thing.

Again, I can see how you can complain about that.

3. He never talked about the signifance of Harrys patronus.

Wow...

4. In the book, Harry receives presents for his birthday while still at the Dursleys. He receives The Monster Book of Monsters from Hagrid, a broom tuning kit from Hermione, and a sneak-o-scope from Ron. In the movie, there is no mention of his birthday and he receives all his school books while at the Leaky Cauldron.

SO?!?!?!

5. In the book, Harry stays for a week in Diagon Alley and purchases his school supplies. In the movie, he stays only for a day.

Does it matter?

6. In the book, when he blows up Aunt Marge she floats to the top of the ceiling and gets stuck. In the movie, Marge floats out the patio door and into the air.

Again, does it matter?

7. In the book, when the Knight Bus is about to hit something, the object moves out of the way, including trees, mailboxes, and telephone booths. In the movie, the bus must avoid hitting objects by swerving, stopping, magically narrowing, or slowing time down.

Again, does it matter?!?!

8. In the book, Harry boards the Knight Bus and states that his name is Neville Longbottom. In the movie, he does not give his name.

DOES IT MATTER?!?!?!

9. In the book, Hermione purchases Crookshanks from a magical petshop in Diagon Alley. In the movie, when Hermione is first seen she already has Crookshanks.

Oh my god, you are really stretching it...

10. In the book, during the quidditch match, Harry sees The Grim in the stands, but in the movie he sees a cloud shaped like The Grim.

Again, stretching...

11. In the book, after Harry finds out Sirius Black "betrayed" his parents, Harry, Ron and Hermione are too stunned to move. In the movie, an irate Harry runs to the shrieking shack and shouts "I hope he finds me. Because when he does I'm gonna be ready. When he does, I'm gonna kill him."

You're really crappy at stretching....

12. In the book, people get past the Whomping Willow by touching a knot that freezes it. In the film, Sirius (as a dog) drags Ron into the Whomping Willow, avoiding its branches, with Harry and Hermione following suit. Lupin meanwhile uses an Immobilizing Charm on it and Snape sneaks after him while it's still deactivated.

Oh mu god...

13. In the film, Lupin reminisces about Lily Potter's good qualities to Harry, saying she was an 'uncommonly kind' woman and could see the beauty in someone even if the person could not see it themselves.

That's pushing it.

14. In the book, Harry, Ron,and Hermione all disarm Snape. In the movie, only Harry performs the Disarming Charm.

ARE YOU ****IN' KIDDING ME?!?!


15. In the book, Harry receives the firebolt as an anonymous Christmas gift. Hermione thinks its from Black and is cursed, so she tells McGonagall who confiscates it for testing, and then both Harry and Ron get mad at Hermione. Harry gets it back in time for the Quidditch Cup. In the movie, Harry receives the firebolt at the end of the film and there is no mention of the Quidditch Cup.

One of your few good points.

If they had all that, we'd have a 5 and a half hour movie. They can't have every ****in' little tidbit.








Jul 29 - 08:37 AM

aknddon3

andrew kruzel

No it would not of been 5 hours long, it would of been about 2 and half hours like it should of been and now because of his mistake they really cannot talk about a lot of different things in the next couple movies. HE MESSED UP. He was more concerned with his own vision then what the movie should be like, that is what happens when you hire hack directors or foreign directors.

Jul 29 - 12:32 PM

Mr. Kong

Sam jacobs

Alright, maybe not 5 hours, but most of the things you complained about weren't important. You had THREE important things that he left out. THREE OUT OF FIFTEEN. Nobody cares if we don't see Crooshanks being purchased, nodody cares if it's only Harry that disarms Snape, nobody cares HOW Harry sees the grim in the movie so long as he sees the god damn grim. With the exception of your three good points, he left out the tidibts that nobody cares about.

Jul 29 - 12:45 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

Lets not forget also that this is a foreign franchise. Except perhaps for the company that distributes it this movie has an entirely British cast, setting, and writing team. Seems a little silly to dis them for going with a foreign director. Yates is foreign (Read not American) as well.

Jul 29 - 02:23 PM

IP

D. W.

"He was more concerned with his own vision then what the movie should be like, that is what happens when you hire hack directors or foreign directors."

Wow, this guy IS an idiot, if his nitpicks about POA wasn't indication enough...

Jul 29 - 08:59 PM

Vicens17

Pas the point Vicens

Some of us dont bow down to Cuaron like most people do.

Jul 28 - 09:38 AM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

I agree Cuaron is not the be all and end all as some people would have him, Personally Children of Men didn't blow my hair back, but he did do a fantastic job with Potter and I wouldn't be broken hearted if he came back for Deathly Hallows. I think it would be semi-appropriate too since DH is also going to be easy to adapt to film and Yates kinda concerns me a bit since he took the longest book to date and made the shortest movie. It worked for Order of the Pheonix, but getting cut happy with Deathly Hallows could be disasterous.

Jul 28 - 11:54 AM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

I agree Cuaron is not the be all and end all as some people would have him, Personally Children of Men didn't blow my hair back, but he did do a fantastic job with Potter and I wouldn't be broken hearted if he came back for Deathly Hallows. I think it would be semi-appropriate too since DH is also going to be easy to adapt to film and Yates kinda concerns me a bit since he took the longest book to date and made the shortest movie. It worked for Order of the Pheonix, but getting cut happy with Deathly Hallows could be disasterous.

Jul 28 - 11:54 AM

aknddon3

andrew kruzel

1. He left out Dumbledores speech about how Wormtail owes harry a life debt, which is important in the last book.

2. He left out major parts about the four friends and never talked about the who moony, padfoot, prongs thing.

3. He never talked about the signifance of Harrys patronus.

4. In the book, Harry receives presents for his birthday while still at the Dursleys. He receives The Monster Book of Monsters from Hagrid, a broom tuning kit from Hermione, and a sneak-o-scope from Ron. In the movie, there is no mention of his birthday and he receives all his school books while at the Leaky Cauldron.

5. In the book, Harry stays for a week in Diagon Alley and purchases his school supplies. In the movie, he stays only for a day.

6. In the book, when he blows up Aunt Marge she floats to the top of the ceiling and gets stuck. In the movie, Marge floats out the patio door and into the air.

7. In the book, when the Knight Bus is about to hit something, the object moves out of the way, including trees, mailboxes, and telephone booths. In the movie, the bus must avoid hitting objects by swerving, stopping, magically narrowing, or slowing time down.

8. In the book, Harry boards the Knight Bus and states that his name is Neville Longbottom. In the movie, he does not give his name.

9. In the book, Hermione purchases Crookshanks from a magical petshop in Diagon Alley. In the movie, when Hermione is first seen she already has Crookshanks.

10. In the book, during the quidditch match, Harry sees The Grim in the stands, but in the movie he sees a cloud shaped like The Grim.

11. In the book, after Harry finds out Sirius Black "betrayed" his parents, Harry, Ron and Hermione are too stunned to move. In the movie, an irate Harry runs to the shrieking shack and shouts "I hope he finds me. Because when he does I'm gonna be ready. When he does, I'm gonna kill him."

12. In the book, people get past the Whomping Willow by touching a knot that freezes it. In the film, Sirius (as a dog) drags Ron into the Whomping Willow, avoiding its branches, with Harry and Hermione following suit. Lupin meanwhile uses an Immobilizing Charm on it and Snape sneaks after him while it's still deactivated.

13. In the film, Lupin reminisces about Lily Potter's good qualities to Harry, saying she was an 'uncommonly kind' woman and could see the beauty in someone even if the person could not see it themselves.

14. In the book, Harry, Ron,and Hermione all disarm Snape. In the movie, only Harry performs the Disarming Charm.

15. In the book, Harry receives the firebolt as an anonymous Christmas gift. Hermione thinks its from Black and is cursed, so she tells McGonagall who confiscates it for testing, and then both Harry and Ron get mad at Hermione. Harry gets it back in time for the Quidditch Cup. In the movie, Harry receives the firebolt at the end of the film and there is no mention of the Quidditch Cup.

So you want more loser?

Notice how the only people who like him are the ones that never read the book. He would ruin the movie and the hack director Del Toro would ruin it too like he did for Blade 2 and Hellboy.

Jul 28 - 01:57 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

OK< You've obviously thought this out and it's important to you, BUT...

1. He implies that Wormtail feels remorse and it's addressed in later movies that he only works for Voldemort out of fear, so the life debt is actually a minor technicality unimportant in the greater scheme of things and easily remedied.

2. As has previously been stated neitehr does any other director. At least he bothers to have a secondary character read the names for people like you who've read the books as a nod to you.

3. I think the Patronus thing was implied by Harry mistaking himself for his father. That's what I got anyway.

4. None of his presents besides the moster book is significant and how he gets it is incosequential. Again minor details and in order not to make a 6 hour movie edits have to be made to all films regardless of their source material.

5. Who cares. Do we really need to see a week of Harry shopping for school supplies?

6. Again who cares? The image of her floating above Privet Drive is better anyway.

7. Again more visually dynamic.

8. Yet again who cares, what's the significance?

9. For the 4th time who cares, is it really important to see Hermione make the purchase. How does that benefit the movie. I love commerce as much as anyone, but it doesn't make for the most riveting scenes.

10. Again, more visually pleasing and was a good lead in to the Dementor attack.

11. Better dramatic effect and speeks better to the audience what he's feeling.

12. That one I'll give you, it could have been done the way the book says with little or no loss, but doesn't come off badly in the film either and was probably left in for the action value of playing tag with the Whomping Willow.

13. OK, it was a nice scene and is a good foreshadowing of a later plot line that becomes important in subsequent films. Whats the problem with it?

14. Probably done to silence the "Why doesn't Harry do anything crowd".

15. Lets be honest, all the quidditch was starting to lose it's coolness which is probably why it's been completely left out since. I think all the additional Quidditch scenes would have had the been there done that feel to them


It's cool that you know all these differences, but by and large they're all nitpicky things which if they have to cut things, and I think it's been established that you do, I'm glad they did those instead of leaving gaping plot holes like swapping characters/leaving characters out or Majorly obvious changes like all the students from Durmstrang being boys and girls from Beaubatants like they did in Goblet of Fire. With books this huge cuts have to be made and I don't think any of the cuts you mention prove any kind of point on the movies overall quality except that it wasn't a word for word scene for scene translation of the book, and to be honest who would want that anyway? Trying to outdo someones own imagination is a recipe for failure and would really only benefit those who hadn't read the books.

Jul 28 - 03:42 PM

Bane Of Anubis

C M

Not sure why you bother... Anyway, whether Cuaron messed it up or not (I, personally, think the tone was darker than it should have been) book 3 was by far the worst of the series (IMO) -- for this one reason (that I've harped on too many times, I know): the deus ex machina device of time travel -- which could be used in previous and subsequent books to solve any problem... It's a horrible plot device....

Book 5 was the most ponderous of the series, but 6 wasn't far behind (typical serial writing -- 600 pages of build up with 100 pages of payoff). I tend to be more critical than the average joe, I guess, but JKR is a good children's writer (strong plot, for the most part, good pacing, for the most part, good description, strong characterization -- probably her best attribute -- though overdone/overexploited at times), but by no means a great writer.

It baffles me that people have put her in the literary ranks of Tolkien and Lewis... Based on pure numbers, she blows them away, but based on literary merit, she's sorely lacking.

Ultimately, she got lucky (to the extent of her prodigious success) -- there are better books out there (by better, in this case, I mean mass market appeal better) -- she caught lightning in an earth-sized bottle...

Jul 29 - 12:03 PM

aknddon3

andrew kruzel

Have you read Lewis? I like him but his books are really not that well written, i mean they are good but really nothing special.

Jul 29 - 12:30 PM

Bane Of Anubis

C M

The Screwtape Letters are pretty slick in terms of style... Narnia, in terms of children's writing, superior to anything by JKR... (in writing, if not, necessarily in plot -- though CSL's works were more inventive IMO).

Jul 29 - 02:17 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

Oh and the most glaring omission for me is the absence of Dobby from all but the second film. many subsequent plot lines were lost by his omission.

Jul 28 - 03:44 PM

CoUcH ToMaToE DoUgIe

Shawn Amoroso

woah, i guess you have a good point, i guess had forgotten all the things missing from the book. still, i was just reacting it to as a great movie, not adaptation. i guess having a harry potter movie that is both an excellent film and adaptation is something almost impossible to achieve. so i guess you are right when it comes to faithfully adapting to the book but i still loved the film as is and its saying something he can make a great film without faithfully sticking to the book. But I guess the great question willl remain in the end: what do you want- A GREAT FILM, POOR ADAPTATION OR A GREAT ADAPTATION, POOR FILM. i don't know its one tough cookie of a problem to crack.

Jul 28 - 09:39 PM

Mr. Kong

Sam jacobs

A good sum of that is nitpicky, aknddon.

1. He left out Dumbledores speech about how Wormtail owes harry a life debt, which is important in the last book.

Alright, that's understandable.

2. He left out major parts about the four friends and never talked about the who moony, padfoot, prongs thing.

Again, I can see how you can complain about that.

3. He never talked about the signifance of Harrys patronus.

Wow...

4. In the book, Harry receives presents for his birthday while still at the Dursleys. He receives The Monster Book of Monsters from Hagrid, a broom tuning kit from Hermione, and a sneak-o-scope from Ron. In the movie, there is no mention of his birthday and he receives all his school books while at the Leaky Cauldron.

SO?!?!?!

5. In the book, Harry stays for a week in Diagon Alley and purchases his school supplies. In the movie, he stays only for a day.

Does it matter?

6. In the book, when he blows up Aunt Marge she floats to the top of the ceiling and gets stuck. In the movie, Marge floats out the patio door and into the air.

Again, does it matter?

7. In the book, when the Knight Bus is about to hit something, the object moves out of the way, including trees, mailboxes, and telephone booths. In the movie, the bus must avoid hitting objects by swerving, stopping, magically narrowing, or slowing time down.

Again, does it matter?!?!

8. In the book, Harry boards the Knight Bus and states that his name is Neville Longbottom. In the movie, he does not give his name.

DOES IT MATTER?!?!?!

9. In the book, Hermione purchases Crookshanks from a magical petshop in Diagon Alley. In the movie, when Hermione is first seen she already has Crookshanks.

Oh my god, you are really stretching it...

10. In the book, during the quidditch match, Harry sees The Grim in the stands, but in the movie he sees a cloud shaped like The Grim.

Again, stretching...

11. In the book, after Harry finds out Sirius Black "betrayed" his parents, Harry, Ron and Hermione are too stunned to move. In the movie, an irate Harry runs to the shrieking shack and shouts "I hope he finds me. Because when he does I'm gonna be ready. When he does, I'm gonna kill him."

You're really crappy at stretching....

12. In the book, people get past the Whomping Willow by touching a knot that freezes it. In the film, Sirius (as a dog) drags Ron into the Whomping Willow, avoiding its branches, with Harry and Hermione following suit. Lupin meanwhile uses an Immobilizing Charm on it and Snape sneaks after him while it's still deactivated.

Oh mu god...

13. In the film, Lupin reminisces about Lily Potter's good qualities to Harry, saying she was an 'uncommonly kind' woman and could see the beauty in someone even if the person could not see it themselves.

That's pushing it.

14. In the book, Harry, Ron,and Hermione all disarm Snape. In the movie, only Harry performs the Disarming Charm.

ARE YOU ****IN' KIDDING ME?!?!


15. In the book, Harry receives the firebolt as an anonymous Christmas gift. Hermione thinks its from Black and is cursed, so she tells McGonagall who confiscates it for testing, and then both Harry and Ron get mad at Hermione. Harry gets it back in time for the Quidditch Cup. In the movie, Harry receives the firebolt at the end of the film and there is no mention of the Quidditch Cup.

One of your few good points.

If they had all that, we'd have a 5 and a half hour movie. They can't have every ****in' little tidbit.








Jul 29 - 08:37 AM

aknddon3

andrew kruzel

No it would not of been 5 hours long, it would of been about 2 and half hours like it should of been and now because of his mistake they really cannot talk about a lot of different things in the next couple movies. HE MESSED UP. He was more concerned with his own vision then what the movie should be like, that is what happens when you hire hack directors or foreign directors.

Jul 29 - 12:32 PM

Mr. Kong

Sam jacobs

Alright, maybe not 5 hours, but most of the things you complained about weren't important. You had THREE important things that he left out. THREE OUT OF FIFTEEN. Nobody cares if we don't see Crooshanks being purchased, nodody cares if it's only Harry that disarms Snape, nobody cares HOW Harry sees the grim in the movie so long as he sees the god damn grim. With the exception of your three good points, he left out the tidibts that nobody cares about.

Jul 29 - 12:45 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

Lets not forget also that this is a foreign franchise. Except perhaps for the company that distributes it this movie has an entirely British cast, setting, and writing team. Seems a little silly to dis them for going with a foreign director. Yates is foreign (Read not American) as well.

Jul 29 - 02:23 PM

IP

D. W.

"He was more concerned with his own vision then what the movie should be like, that is what happens when you hire hack directors or foreign directors."

Wow, this guy IS an idiot, if his nitpicks about POA wasn't indication enough...

Jul 29 - 08:59 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

OK< You've obviously thought this out and it's important to you, BUT...

1. He implies that Wormtail feels remorse and it's addressed in later movies that he only works for Voldemort out of fear, so the life debt is actually a minor technicality unimportant in the greater scheme of things and easily remedied.

2. As has previously been stated neitehr does any other director. At least he bothers to have a secondary character read the names for people like you who've read the books as a nod to you.

3. I think the Patronus thing was implied by Harry mistaking himself for his father. That's what I got anyway.

4. None of his presents besides the moster book is significant and how he gets it is incosequential. Again minor details and in order not to make a 6 hour movie edits have to be made to all films regardless of their source material.

5. Who cares. Do we really need to see a week of Harry shopping for school supplies?

6. Again who cares? The image of her floating above Privet Drive is better anyway.

7. Again more visually dynamic.

8. Yet again who cares, what's the significance?

9. For the 4th time who cares, is it really important to see Hermione make the purchase. How does that benefit the movie. I love commerce as much as anyone, but it doesn't make for the most riveting scenes.

10. Again, more visually pleasing and was a good lead in to the Dementor attack.

11. Better dramatic effect and speeks better to the audience what he's feeling.

12. That one I'll give you, it could have been done the way the book says with little or no loss, but doesn't come off badly in the film either and was probably left in for the action value of playing tag with the Whomping Willow.

13. OK, it was a nice scene and is a good foreshadowing of a later plot line that becomes important in subsequent films. Whats the problem with it?

14. Probably done to silence the "Why doesn't Harry do anything crowd".

15. Lets be honest, all the quidditch was starting to lose it's coolness which is probably why it's been completely left out since. I think all the additional Quidditch scenes would have had the been there done that feel to them


It's cool that you know all these differences, but by and large they're all nitpicky things which if they have to cut things, and I think it's been established that you do, I'm glad they did those instead of leaving gaping plot holes like swapping characters/leaving characters out or Majorly obvious changes like all the students from Durmstrang being boys and girls from Beaubatants like they did in Goblet of Fire. With books this huge cuts have to be made and I don't think any of the cuts you mention prove any kind of point on the movies overall quality except that it wasn't a word for word scene for scene translation of the book, and to be honest who would want that anyway? Trying to outdo someones own imagination is a recipe for failure and would really only benefit those who hadn't read the books.

Jul 28 - 03:42 PM

Bane Of Anubis

C M

Not sure why you bother... Anyway, whether Cuaron messed it up or not (I, personally, think the tone was darker than it should have been) book 3 was by far the worst of the series (IMO) -- for this one reason (that I've harped on too many times, I know): the deus ex machina device of time travel -- which could be used in previous and subsequent books to solve any problem... It's a horrible plot device....

Book 5 was the most ponderous of the series, but 6 wasn't far behind (typical serial writing -- 600 pages of build up with 100 pages of payoff). I tend to be more critical than the average joe, I guess, but JKR is a good children's writer (strong plot, for the most part, good pacing, for the most part, good description, strong characterization -- probably her best attribute -- though overdone/overexploited at times), but by no means a great writer.

It baffles me that people have put her in the literary ranks of Tolkien and Lewis... Based on pure numbers, she blows them away, but based on literary merit, she's sorely lacking.

Ultimately, she got lucky (to the extent of her prodigious success) -- there are better books out there (by better, in this case, I mean mass market appeal better) -- she caught lightning in an earth-sized bottle...

Jul 29 - 12:03 PM

aknddon3

andrew kruzel

Have you read Lewis? I like him but his books are really not that well written, i mean they are good but really nothing special.

Jul 29 - 12:30 PM

Bane Of Anubis

C M

The Screwtape Letters are pretty slick in terms of style... Narnia, in terms of children's writing, superior to anything by JKR... (in writing, if not, necessarily in plot -- though CSL's works were more inventive IMO).

Jul 29 - 02:17 PM

Bigbrother

Big Brother

Oh and the most glaring omission for me is the absence of Dobby from all but the second film. many subsequent plot lines were lost by his omission.

Jul 28 - 03:44 PM

Huntressmoon13

M. K.

I thought Yates did ok, but he needs to fire the *** of the editor of the film, or at least take better care in overseeing what would be the good shots for the film.

Kindly consider Exhibit A-

The scene with Harry and Snape doing the later Occlumency session. When Snape has a line to the effect of "...then prove it" to Harry, most of it is said offscreen with Harry's reaction, and then a sloppy cut to Snape's reaction in the last little part of the line. Think how much tighter the tension of the scene if it quickly cut to Rickman actually saying the entire line onscreen.

I rest my case.

However, I'd love to see what Cuaron does should he be asked to return for DH.

Jul 28 - 05:51 PM

Akira762

Rob Benner

He will probably get cut from the 6th movie too and Harry will only have Kreacher tail Draco instead of both of them. But hey at least he will definately by in the 7th movie. Im not too upset about them leaving out Winky and all the S.P.E.W. **** from the 4th and 5th books though.

Jul 28 - 05:58 PM

CoUcH ToMaToE DoUgIe

Shawn Amoroso

woah, i guess you have a good point, i guess had forgotten all the things missing from the book. still, i was just reacting it to as a great movie, not adaptation. i guess having a harry potter movie that is both an excellent film and adaptation is something almost impossible to achieve. so i guess you are right when it comes to faithfully adapting to the book but i still loved the film as is and its saying something he can make a great film without faithfully sticking to the book. But I guess the great question willl remain in the end: what do you want- A GREAT FILM, POOR ADAPTATION OR A GREAT ADAPTATION, POOR FILM. i don't know its one tough cookie of a problem to crack.

Jul 28 - 09:39 PM

Floor Man

Floor Man

If Cuarón returned to direct DH, I'd be ecstatic. I certainly would be perfectly fine if Yates did it, but I don't think he'll direct DH if he's directing both OotP and HBP, so I'm really interested to see if the studio picks a previous director to return or a completely new one altogether.... Please, pick Cuarón! Then, if ILM got some help from WETA for the effects on DH, whew...I'd pretty much die of a happiness aneurysm.

Jul 29 - 12:21 AM

gonadz

Tim Goens

It is a good thing you aren't writing the movies then Aknddon3.

Since bigbrother already replied point-for-point, I won't do that. But you seem to be too stuck on stuff that really doesnt matter. Yes, I do wish they had touched upon the 4 friends making the map and why Harry's patronus is a stag, but they didn't. I am glad you replied with what you were thinking, but not one single item on that list makes it a different movie.

If you wanted to go blow-by-blow and list the differences in all the books to movies, you would be busy for a week, there are so many. This is a wonderful world that Rowling has created, and I was to see what someone is capable of doing with it, without using the written word as law. PoA was the first to do that. The first 2 movies were such literal translations that it just didn't have a life of its own. Was there a choir in the book that sang "Something Wicked This Way Comes?" No, but I love that in the movie, it adds a richness that wasn't there before.

As for why I liked Cuaron, he also brought a style to the film the Columbus didn't have. Columbus was very by-the-books. I enjoyed the first 2, but they are always going to be my least favorite. I admit I love Cuaron now, Children of Men was my second favorite movie of the year last year, right in front of Pan's Labyrinth. So yes, I love Del Toro too. Have you seen Chronos or the Devil's Backbone? Is he perfect? No, just look at Mimic.

Anyway, I am just a loser apparently so whatever.

Jul 29 - 12:25 AM

aknddon3

andrew kruzel

Wow gonadz you are a loser that is obviously a cuaron fluffer. If Yates or columbus made POA everyone would of hated it. I want a real director for the last movie, not some hack who ruined POA or some hack that ruined Hellboy and Blade. I would love if Spielberg or Scorsace(sp), the two best directors right now if ever, but i would have to say that Yates or Jackson would be fine.

P.S. If Children of Men and Pans was your two favorite movies last year that means you are a joke, anybody who did not have The Departed as one or two knows nothing about movies, you can never talk again.

P.P.S. When you make a movie based off of a book you better make it like the book Cuaron cannot do that because if he made DH how much you would you bet that he would not have Dobby die or would kill the wrong people and change the ending he would ruin it.

Jul 29 - 02:04 AM

gonadz

Tim Goens

I am so glad you read my post carefully...I said Children of Men was #2 and that it was right in from of Pan's. That meant they were #2 and #3. The Departed is one of my all time favorite movies, and I am sure I appreciate it a whole hell of a lot more than you.

Now, I am only guessing that you didn't see Infernal Affairs, did you? Because anyone who is a stickler for changing things would not have liked some of the changes they made to that movie.

Jul 29 - 07:50 AM

Mr. Kong

Sam jacobs

CUARON! CUARON! CUARON! I thought POA was the best of them all and would love to see him back.

Jul 29 - 08:21 AM

CoUcH ToMaToE DoUgIe

Shawn Amoroso

thank god, for BatSpideyKong. the voice of reason everyone. prisoner of Azabakan is the

best, take that aknoddon3!

Jul 31 - 08:31 PM

What's Hot On RT

Richard Linklater
Richard Linklater

What are his Five Favorite Films?

The Hunger Games
The Hunger Games

New Mockingjay teaser trailer

Emmys
Emmys

Full 2014 nominations list

Planet of the Apes
Planet of the Apes

Watch interviews with the cast

Find us on:                     
Help | About | Jobs | Critics Submission | Press | API | Licensing | Mobile