Originally Posted By leemac <<OMG... how old are you? I think we may have been separated at birth. lol>> Hold the front pages - 101 Sensational Front Page Exclusive Dalmatians - Dr Hans and Lee Separated at birth I suspect I'm a lot younger than you.
Originally Posted By leemac There is something about pop culture for the current generation that means they obsess over it. It is unquestionably exacerbated by 24/7 media. I've got no problem with folks being obsessive over HP. However it does bother me that pulp fiction like HP or Twilight or The Hunger Games are the only books that some kids read these days. There is a reason why none of them have a Pulitzer. Same for the features. Personally I can't fathom how anyone would find them anything more than tolerable and there is a reason why none of them were Academy Award-nominated for Best Picture - even with an expanded category that somehow included crap like War Horse and Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close last year. This isn't me being particularly elitist either - I can happily read a trashy novel or enjoy a popcorn flick. Gone Girl is the best book I've read in years. The Avengers was a phenomenally good summer action movie. I just don't see how HP is a particularly good example of either fictional writing or strong movie-making.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper I'm not getting into this conversation, other than to say that comparing HP, which basically made reading "cool" and acted as a gateway for an entire generation, to Twilight and Hunger Games that are basically just PG-13 romance novels is silly.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I just don't see how HP is a particularly good example of either fictional writing or strong movie-making.<< I read the Harry Potter books aloud, with my kids. Even after they were clearly capable of reading them themselves, it became part of our shared experience for me to read them aloud. It's a treasured memory. The books were funny, exciting and had a good message as well. In one of the books, Dumbledore talks about the difference between doing what is right, and doing what is easy. Along the way, the concept of hypocrisy, government overreach in the name of security, love, hate and mistaken first impressions were all explored. The movies were very faithful to the books and it was cool watching the main leads become better and better actors as they aged. With various directors the films carried along pretty well, though the death of a key character was botched. Just about any book that excites kids about reading is a good book, awards or not. And the Harry Potter series did that in spades. Like the Tolkein books, Hardy Boys, Nancy Drew and others, Harry Potter sparked the imagination of a whole generation. The movies and books were huge hits. They attracted kids and adults, families and singles, who all got caught up in it. Clearly, some people just aren't into it, and that's fine. But I think dismissing it as junk is unfair. In other words, Harry Potter is not on trial here!
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom I haven't read any of the HP books or have seen any HP movies. I have zero intrest in HP. I'm not trying to be snotty. Just totally not intrested in HP. I also do not care for horror flicks. Just me being me. Obviously, I have zero intrest in HP land over at Universal. I would much rather be spending time in the proposed Fantasyland extention with all the Princesses and Pixie Hollow rather than Harry Potter land. I also feel the same way about Avatar. Althought I have seen the movie and enjoyed Sigourney Weaver, I have no intrest in any rides regarding this rehash of various SciFi movies. I am a huge SciFi fan.... and something original would be appreciated. I'm not going to disregard the proposed Avatar attractions. For all I know I might enjoy them. I just didn't find the movie compelling. I think other directors produced better movies with a better plot and more originality with less predictability.
Originally Posted By leemac Sweet story 2oony. I didn't mean to imply that the books are junk - they aren't - but I don't subscribe to the notion that they are high works of art either. The concepts and stories aren't original - those basic conceits of good versus evil were handled far more adroitly by the likes of Tolkien and Lewis. As you say - if they get kids reading then that has to be a positive - I just wish they were then migrating on to better works of fiction. I'm glad to say I've never read any of the apparently hundreds of SW novels!
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<But I think dismissing it as junk is unfair.>> I beg to differ. Just because something is popular doesn't mean it is quality. Take Kim Kardashian for example. No one is argueing that HP has been popular. What folks are argueing is it's quality. Again, I have zero intrest in it and I love Lord of the Rings. I can remember going out Trick or Treating as Aragorn while a child. I still have that forest green cape and wooden staff! I use to reread the Hobbit ever fall. That's how enduring and compelling Tolkien's books are, and what a good read The Hobbit is. Tolkien is credited with creating a new language.
Originally Posted By leemac Tom - I'm exactly the same (although the other half made me watch the films). Fantasy has always been a tough genre for me. I can appreciate Tolkien or Lewis but they don't hook me. I think I usually need some kind of empathy with the characters and my imagination doesn't seem to want to stretch that far. Never seen LOTR - no desire to do so either. Sci-fi is another tough one for me. SW does little for me. Same for Trek. I've never seen Avatar and doubt I ever will suffer through it. Oddly enough comic books were never part of my childhood but ever since Burton's Batman I've enjoyed that genre.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom I like scifi, but I should point out I have never seen, nor have any desire to see ET. So, just because something is scifi doesn't mean it automatically appeals to me. I read and enjoyed The Hobbit long before I ever saw any of the cartoons or movie. I guess the same is true for Harry Potter. A series about a bumbling child Wizard has little intrest to me. I never understood the appeal of setting a childs book in a school.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I beg to differ. Just because something is popular doesn't mean it is quality.<< Granted, but note that I did explain at some length the thought and effort behind the books and movies. I understand that they do not appeal to you, but they are a far cry from Kim Kardashian! >>I never understood the appeal of setting a childs book in a school.<< Because that is a world a child recognizes and knows every well. To start with the familiar (school) and move onto the extraordinary (wizard classes) is fun and a tried and true literary device. >>As you say - if they get kids reading then that has to be a positive - I just wish they were then migrating on to better works of fiction.<< For what it's worth, my daughter has gone on to be a voracious reader, leaning always towards classic literature. She's really never been much into fantasy stuff like Harry Potter after we were finished with them, but she reads a ton. I think if a parent, teacher or friend can spark that interest in reading, regardless of the genre, it leads to good things. >>I have zero intrest in it and I love Lord of the Rings.<< LOL, I couldn't get into Lord of the Rings, but loved the Potter books/movies. Different strokes for different folks.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <--- has never seen a "Harry Potter" movie. But loves the "Star Wars" universe overall.
Originally Posted By Yookeroo "Same for the features. Personally I can't fathom how anyone would find them anything more than tolerable and there is a reason why none of them were Academy Award-nominated for Best Picture - even with an expanded category that somehow included crap like War Horse and Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close last year." But they all got strong reviews. Maybe it's just "different strokes...". "I didn't mean to imply that the books are junk - they aren't - but I don't subscribe to the notion that they are high works of art either. " Who's calling them high works of art?
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 LOL, I couldn't get into Lord of the Rings, but loved the Potter books/movies. Different strokes for different folks.<< No offense but I find Harry Potter to basically be a dumbed down version of Lord of the Rings...
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Also, I find the concept of Darth Vader and two Stormtroopers running around Disneyland...odd. <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/losangeles/news/2012/10/31/the-force-is-with-the-disney-lucasfilm.html" target="_blank">http://www.bizjournals.com/los...ilm.html</a> Who decided that Darth Vader should be used as a befuddled straight man -- dropping him into anachronistic settings and situations. Tom-Tom had Vader recording GPS directions for a commercial, and ESPN had a series of commercials using Chewie and Stormtroopers etc.. Disney pays $4 billion for the "Stat Wars" family and they toss Darth Vader into the tea cup ride? Granted, "Star Wars" isn't national security and characters I suppose, don't have to be lionized, but from a branding perspective -- what's the deal? It feels very odd to me.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 Jim, this was filmed over a year ago for the new Star Tours, this isn't "new" footage per say...
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<Sigh. Muggles...>> Humm, I just think a large number of writers have gone much further, with the fantasy genre. I never felt a part of the target audience. I think those books are written to appeal to a younger audience.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I think those books are written to appeal to a younger audience.<< Absolutely.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Thanks for clarifying that, WilliamK99. It's new to me. And even so, does anyone else see the weirdness of using the characters in this way?
