This was one of the most faithful renderings of a fantasy novel I have ever seen, witholding final judgement until Lord of The Rings comes out here in a bit.

Having many of my favorite sci-fi and fantasy books prostituted on the twin Hollywood altars of profit and pandering, I was slightly apprehensive about this flick, but all I can say is WOW
:thumbs up: [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]
yes, two thumbs up, Amanda was rapt the entire time, which is quite a feat, considering her media attention span of a gnat generated by the cartoon channel. ;)
Having read the first three books at least a half dozen times now, I was keen to any deviation, and they certainly exist, needing at least 9 or 10 hours to actually do the story justice on the screen; but, I was pleased at how seamlessly they were done.
Considering all the media hype about how the author was involved, I thought the things left out gave a certain view on what she found important.
Final Judgement?---I am going to get myself a dvd player for X-mas this year, so I can buy the DVD as soon as it is out! :D
I loved it, had a great time, take your kid, borrow the neighbor's, or suck it up and go alone in a robe and conical hat, but GO! [img]smile.gif[/img] [img]smile.gif[/img] [img]smile.gif[/img]

i dont know why, but i never really liked the harry movie.

<font size=5> I HATE HARRY POTTER!!!!

your not the only one, Drew...

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Grand-Ranger:
I HATE HARRY POTTER!!!!<hr></blockquote>

yea, what he said

[ 11-18-2001: Message edited by: Barloc ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Grand-Ranger:
<font size=5> I HATE HARRY POTTER!!!!<hr></blockquote>
A tad bit vociferous, tadpole, but I get your drift - it may seem awfully trite to such jaded connoisseurs of the realm as yourselves. What is it
exactly
that makes your barf, barloc, septhpthpht!y?
know that i know how you feel, how 'bout some specifics?
.....---and, I would close your font size, but this is kind of funny!! [img]tongue.gif[/img]
[img]graemlins/lightning.gif[/img]

[ 11-18-2001: Message edited by: J.J. ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Barloc:
i dont know why, but i never really liked the harry movie.<hr></blockquote>

you sound as if you are remembering it from a distance not far akin to a galaxy far, far, away, and a time long, long, ago?
what alternate universe had you already seen it in? :rolleyes:

because its what i call 'imitation fantasy'. the only real elements of fantasy in them are magic and a few of the monsters, thats it. no Elves, no Orcs, no Dwarves, no Halflings/Hobbits, no real Gnomes, nothing! also, i could do a better job than Rowling, i'm sure... also part of this may be my forced torment of listening to my 6th grade reading class basically struggle through the book while i sat at my desk, pounding my head on the top of it while taking occasional breathers to make a crude drawing.

Details...very well:

I dislike Harry Potter because, IMHO, he ruins the Fantasy genere.

Kids that read it are going think that is fantasy, and well, its not. They are going to grow up thinking Harry Potter, opoised to Dirrzt Do'urden, Tanis Half-Elven, Gandalg, Frodo, Elminster, Tasselhoff Burrfoot, is fantasy.

They are going to think that "The Socerers Stone" is a good read, when There is IWD and The DragonLance Chronicals, the list gose on.

They are going to think that the Fantasy Genere consists of "Magic Tricks" as to Raistlin Going back in time.

As to The Rings in LotRs.

As to The Crystal Shard.

Thats why I dislike Harry Poter. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Well I have never read Harry Potter nor have I seen the film. One of the wonderful things about the free world, is that there is such an incredible diversity of people and preferences, and providing no laws are broken or participants in their enjoyment are not abused or violated, then we are free to pick and chose that which suits our particular tastes. Fantasy is an incredibly broad genre and while many will not like Harry Potter based on their preferences, many will also enjoy it immensley.
J. J. my friend, I am very happy to hear that you and Amanda had a wonderful time watching Harry Potter together.
Trip to the movies, 25-30 dollars.
Harry Potter, the ultimate in fantasy? Probably not.
J. J. and Amanda loved it and had a wonderful time! PRICELESS!

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by The.Relic:
Well I have never read Harry Potter nor have I seen the film. One of the wonderful things about the free world, is that there is such an incredible diversity of people and preferences, and providing no laws are broken or participants in their enjoyment are not abused or violated, then we are free to pick and chose that which suits our particular tastes. Fantasy is an incredibly broad genre and while many will not like Harry Potter based on their preferences, many will also enjoy it immensley.
J. J. my friend, I am very happy to hear that you and Amanda had a wonderful time watching Harry Potter together.
Trip to the movies, 25-30 dollars.
Harry Potter, the ultimate in fantasy? Probably not.
J. J. and Amanda loved it and had a wonderful time! PRICELESS!<hr></blockquote>

ahhh... a mastercard example :D

[ 11-18-2001: Message edited by: Barloc ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Grand-Ranger:
Details...very well:

I dislike Harry Potter because, IMHO, he ruins the Fantasy genere.

Kids that read it are going think that is fantasy, and well, its not. They are going to grow up thinking Harry Potter, opoised to Dirrzt Do'urden, Tanis Half-Elven, Gandalg, Frodo, Elminster, Tasselhoff Burrfoot, is fantasy.

They are going to think that "The Socerers Stone" is a good read, when There is IWD and The DragonLance Chronicals, the list gose on.

They are going to think that the Fantasy Genere consists of "Magic Tricks" as to Raistlin Going back in time.

As to The Rings in LotRs.

As to The Crystal Shard.

Thats why I dislike Harry Poter. [img]smile.gif[/img] <hr></blockquote>

Oh come now.. Harry Potter IS Fantasy. It's just a different type, and I thought the movie was great! It is more for kids, but I've never read any of the books, so it was all 'new' to me..

I thought it was good, but the 'troll' looked more like a giant to me.. Trolls are much shorter and green and you need fire to kill them. But I did wish there was more monsters in the movie..

You can't base everything on LotR and D&D.. Every generation has their 'own' thing.. we have Transformers and GIJOE as cartoons, and some of you younger folks here have Teenage Mutant Turtles and Power Rangers.. see where I'm going? Don't close your mind to everything, take a chance and you might just like it! ;)

I'll say this: The Potter Movie totally KILLED the 'Dungeons & Dragons' Movie, BIG TIME. ;)

I can't wait to see The Lord of the Rings... I am HOPING it's done well. In the trailers, I have yet to see a Hobit.. Only humans.. It LOOKS to be big budget, but as you know, that doesn't mean diddly (Waterworld) [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img]

Where is them there Harry Potter Smilies??!?! :D

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by SSJ4Sephiroth:
because its what i call 'imitation fantasy'. the only real elements of fantasy in them are magic and a few of the monsters, thats it. no Elves, no Orcs, no Dwarves, no Halflings/Hobbits, no real Gnomes, nothing! also, i could do a better job than Rowling, i'm sure... <hr></blockquote>

What do you mean, 'imitation fantasy'? Surely fantasy's fantasy. I would think the beauty of the genre is that it can be anything it wants to be. Why should it include every race, every monster, every element so-called 'real fantasy' has? That would be a bit boring wouldn't it? The only problem I have with Harry Potter, and I haven't read any, is that people call it the 'new Enid Blyton'. What do we need a new Enid for? The old one rocked, and still does ;) !

I am not closing my mind.

I am jsut saying LotR and DND, thats what fantasy is.

You wouldnt make a comedy and call it a mystoriy, cause thas not what it is.

Harry Potter isnt Fantasy, so I dont think you should call him that.

And how would I be closing my mind if I mentioned both LotR and DND? There 2 diffrent things.

Harry Potter isnt fantasy. The only element of fantasy to it is that he was a wizard, and none of his spells or wizardness is orginal, at least not what I rember.

As humans, we are fond of breaking every subject into sub-groups and often insisting that they are not related. We rarely think of Science Fiction or Romance novels as fantasy, but in fact, they are. The following is the Websters Dictionay online definition of fantasy.

fan·ta·sy (fnt-s, -z)
n. pl. fan·ta·sies
The creative imagination; unrestrained fancy. See Synonyms at imagination.
Something, such as an invention, that is a creation of the fancy.
A capricious or fantastic idea; a conceit.

Fiction characterized by highly fanciful or supernatural elements.
An example of such fiction.
An imagined event or sequence of mental images, such as a daydream, usually fulfilling a wish or psychological need.
An unrealistic or improbable supposition.
Music. See fantasia.
A coin issued especially by a questionable authority and not intended for use as currency.
Obsolete. A hallucination.

We are all entitled to our own preferences in taste, but with all due respect, Harry Potter is as much fantasy as is Star Wars, or the dream I had last night of Angelina Jolie.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by The.Relic:

fan·ta·sy (fnt-s, -z)
n. pl. fan·ta·sies
The creative imagination; unrestrained fancy. See Synonyms at imagination.
Something, such as an invention, that is a creation of the fancy.
A capricious or fantastic idea; a conceit.

We are all entitled to our own preferences in taste, but with all due respect, Harry Potter is as much fantasy as is Star Wars, or the dream I had last night of Angelina Jolie.<hr></blockquote>

Yes! Exactly! It's not very fantastic to have a fantasy genre in which you're told, right! Here are the spells you're allowed to use. Here are the monsters. Here are the races. You must use them all, no less, and CERTAINLY no more. No imagination, please! We've got our fantasy world, and that's all we want ;)

Your all missing my point.

Harry Potter isnt the kind of fantasy that should be grouped with things like DL and FR and LotR and The Death Dealer serries.


I guess Harry Potter is fantasy in the way of bending the way real life happens.

Buts it not Fantasy as in what the genere of fantasy is supouse to be.

Now dont (like you have been doing) take that as "You can only have Elfs,Dwarfs Gnomes, Trolls, and Gaints" You can do anything you want and call it fantasy as long as it has a fantasy consept. Harry Potter dosent.


And Z,

You said Trolls can onlky be killed with Fire, isnt that being close minded to DnD?

Hi Grand-Ranger!
Actually I do understand your point, and you are right, Harry Potter doesn't fit into the same sub-group of fantasy with LoTR, DL, FR etetera. And I honestly don't beleive that anyone in this thread made any effort to try and catergorize Harry Potter with them. I re-read the posts just to make sure.
J. J. was just sharing his views on the fantasy film, "Harry Potter". I think the thread may have gotten confused in that you stated that Harry Potter isn't "fantasy", meaning that it didn't qualify in the same sense with LoTR and others, which is absolutely correct. While in the broad spectrum it is fantasy which the rest of us were trying to point out, because we didn't realize that you were specifying a particular venue of fantasy. There is "No harm, no foul" here as far as I can see. [img]smile.gif[/img]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by The.Relic:
Well I have never read Harry Potter nor have I seen the film. One of the wonderful things about the free world, is that there is such an incredible diversity of people and preferences, and providing no laws are broken or participants in their enjoyment are not abused or violated, then we are free to pick and chose that which suits our particular tastes. Fantasy is an incredibly broad genre and while many will not like Harry Potter based on their preferences, many will also enjoy it immensley.
J. J. my friend, I am very happy to hear that you and Amanda had a wonderful time watching Harry Potter together.
Trip to the movies, 25-30 dollars.
Harry Potter, the ultimate in fantasy? Probably not.
J. J. and Amanda loved it and had a wonderful time! PRICELESS!<hr></blockquote>

Thank you, The. Relic, you have summed up the specific and relative costs most succinctly :D

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Grand-Ranger:
Your all missing my point.

Harry Potter isnt the kind of fantasy that should be grouped with things like DL and FR and LotR and The Death Dealer serries.


I guess Harry Potter is fantasy in the way of bending the way real life happens.

Buts it not Fantasy as in what the genere of fantasy is supouse to be.

Now dont (like you have been doing) take that as "You can only have Elfs,Dwarfs Gnomes, Trolls, and Gaints" You can do anything you want and call it fantasy as long as it has a fantasy consept. Harry Potter dosent.


And Z,

You said Trolls can onlky be killed with Fire, isnt that being close minded to DnD?<hr></blockquote>

Huh? Trolls have always
alwaysalways
(did not want to wait for the scripts box)
been susceptable to fire, what not on this earth are you talking about?

Now, remember, Z, and Relic, these guys are at the age where they are 'absolutists, or purists' - do you remember it? that time when hypocrisy and take-off seemed rampant in your life? I remember it well, don't be too hard on these guys. .Relic, you DID understand what I was saying, as Z did :D go see it - it is fun! [img]smile.gif[/img]

Hmm, I sincerely hope that my posts haven't come accross as being hard on anyone, because that certainly was never my intent. If my posts did come accross that way I do apologize. I was merely trying to help us all understand what we were trying to say and noting how I think some of the confusion came about.

[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: The.Relic ]</p>

I haven't read the books so i dont know if i want to see the movie, but there are cool special effects though [img]smile.gif[/img]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by The.Relic:
Hmm, I sincerely hope that my posts haven't come accross as being hard on anyone, because that certainly was never my intent. If my posts did come accross that way I do apologize. I was merely trying to help us all understand what we were trying to say and noting how I think some of the confusion came about.

[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: The.Relic ]<hr></blockquote>

No, no, not at all, you are the same ol' softy you always have been [img]smile.gif[/img] , I do have to admit that I am suprised by the vehemence of those who have not even seen the movie, or read the books - they seem to be the only ones disparaging it. - I
still encourage everyone who is a fantasy fan

you purists note - (they do have a pretty good goblin(s) at Gringott's Bank, and the Centaur and the Cerebrus are done as well as any I've seen, and better than most, the baby dragon and all the Hall Ghosts original, go SEE it and then come back with intelligent comments [img]tongue.gif[/img]

to borrow a kid or just go, I had a blast, and one other advantage - if you think you know enough to understand the book after seeing the movie - you got about 25% of the content, with about 60% of the meaning - the movie will motivate you to read the book, which is the original reward - I am so happy with how much better Amanda is reading since I started reading this to her, and it has given us another thing in common that will last throughout her life as well, hopefully she will become a book worm like her old man :rolleyes:

[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: J.J. ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Grand-Ranger:
I am not closing my mind.

I am just saying LotR and DND, thats what fantasy is.
<hr></blockquote>

Re-read the above.. Come on now.. Fantasy is ANYTHING fantastic. Fantasy covers a WIDE range of things, NOT just D&D or LotR.. Come on.. Go look up the word Fantasy and read it.

If you think that D&D and LotR are what fantasy is, and 'that's it', then, yes, you ARE closing your mind.

[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: Ziroc ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by The.Relic:
As humans, we are fond of breaking every subject into sub-groups and often insisting that they are not related. We rarely think of Science Fiction or Romance novels as fantasy, but in fact, they are. The following is the Websters Dictionay online definition of fantasy.

fan·ta·sy (fnt-s, -z)
n. pl. fan·ta·sies
The creative imagination; unrestrained fancy. See Synonyms at imagination.
Something, such as an invention, that is a creation of the fancy.
A capricious or fantastic idea; a conceit.

Fiction characterized by highly fanciful or supernatural elements.
An example of such fiction.
An imagined event or sequence of mental images, such as a daydream, usually fulfilling a wish or psychological need.
An unrealistic or improbable supposition.
Music. See fantasia.
A coin issued especially by a questionable authority and not intended for use as currency.
Obsolete. A hallucination.

We are all entitled to our own preferences in taste, but with all due respect, Harry Potter is as much fantasy as is Star Wars, or the dream I had last night of Angelina Jolie.<hr></blockquote>


Thank You!!!! :D

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Your all missing my point.

Harry Potter isnt the kind of fantasy that should be grouped with things like DL and FR and LotR and The Death Dealer serries.
<hr></blockquote>

Who said we're 'grouping' anything? You said it wasn't FANTASY.

-----
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>
And Z,

You said Trolls can onlky be killed with Fire, isnt that being close minded to DnD?<hr></blockquote>

No, it's not. In MANY MANY stories, Trolls have been killed by fire, it's not something D&D 'created'. lol. Haven't you read any non-AD&D type fantasy novels?

[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: Ziroc ]</p>

Still have to wait another 10 days for the movie here in Oz, but I am REALLY looking forward to it ...

I'm not really fussed whether Harry Potter is good/bad/non-classic fantasy or whatever. They are just damm fine entertaining reads for children and adults.

IMHO, why Harry Potter has been so successful.

The books are a blend of three classic story themes:

• The "school boarding house" novel. ( As done so well by Enid Blyton and Anthony Buckeridge )
  Magic, wizards, and witches.( always popular !! )
  Detective mystery( to add lasting interest )

The books don't patronize.

They are written at a level that almost begs for the reader look for the hidden and not-so-hidden pokes at life stereotypes and absurdities.

The continuity between books is excellent.

On the downside, I am dismayed that Harry Potter has fallen prey to the evils of saturation merchandising, especially the contract with Coca Cola. I read that Coke paid Warner Bros more for the merchandising rights, than it cost WB to make the movie !!

[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: Pangur Ban ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ziroc:
Your all missing my point.

Harry Potter isnt the kind of fantasy that should be grouped with things like DL and FR and LotR and The Death Dealer serries.


Who said we're 'grouping' anything? You said it wasn't FANTASY.

-----
And Z,

You said Trolls can onlky be killed with Fire, isnt that being close minded to DnD?<hr></blockquote>

No, it's not. In MANY MANY stories, Trolls have been killed by fire, it's not something D&D 'created'. lol. Haven't you read any non-AD&D type fantasy novels?[/QB][/QUOTE]

LOL, tooo funnneee, Z, good point, and what are you doing up so late? [img]graemlins/nono.gif[/img] :D

Heh, speaking of Trolls, who prefers the graphic portrayal of Trolls in the;
1) Classical artist presentations such as "Brothers Grimm", etcetera?
2) More current varieties such as AD&D and BG2?

I have to admit that I am somewhat progressionist regarding art, so I can cheerfully maintain my nestalgiac appreciation of the classical as well as revell in the newer imaginative efforts.

First, I have read each of the first three books 15 times, and the 4th 11. I enjoy them IMMENSELY! and they are, IMHO, great books for kids and adults. I have also read many DnD type fantasy, and am a huge LOTR fan.

Second, thanx J.J. for the review. I am going to see the movie Wednesday with some friends, and am glad to hear it wasn't totally blasphemous. :D

Third, you can dislike Harry if you want, but it IS fantasy! It is a different style of writing from that of Tolkien and others like him, but it is still within the fantasy genre, and actually, I think it was nice to see a GOOD fantasy that wasn't a Tolkien imitation(not that those are all bad, but they are all so similiar).

[img]smile.gif[/img]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by The.Relic:
Heh, speaking of Trolls, who prefers the graphic portrayal of Trolls in the;
1) Classical artist presentations such as "Brothers Grimm", etcetera?
2) More current varieties such as AD&D and BG2?

I have to admit that I am somewhat progressionist regarding art, so I can cheerfully maintain my nestalgiac appreciation of the classical as well as revell in the newer imaginative efforts.<hr></blockquote>

If you are a troll fan, .Relic, then I would go see the movie just for the mountain troll scene - he is a great troll! [img]smile.gif[/img]

Good to hear you and Amanda had a good time watching the movie J.J., I doubt I will be watching it myself though, I got the 1st book in the series as a present once, I didn't even get past the first chapter before I put it down, hmmmm.... Maybe I should consider giving it another try?

Harry Potter IS fantsy, although not in the LoTR style. I havent read the books, no. But everything I have read about them....yes fantasy books. Regardless the popularity of Harry Potter books encourages reading amongst younger people which I heartilly endorse! I'm sure many are looking for other reading material of the same nature and I'm glad to see it. And yes I'll be going to see the movie and I'm an old guy (37 :D )

Only 9 years to go Pauly and you will catch up with me. Hmm, wait a minute, you can't ever catch up with me. I will always stay 9 years ahead. Heh, well this sux. [img]smile.gif[/img]

LOL Marc well I'll keep trying! I'm determined to catch up to you old-guy [img]tongue.gif[/img]