|
Post by pantstheterrible on Jun 13, 2004 15:00:12 GMT -5
Was there actually any tears? It just seemed to me he had a lot of anguish built up. I liked that he was rocking. or is that just my imagination? I rock when I'm sad or in pain.
|
|
|
Post by *~Ginny~* on Jun 13, 2004 15:02:50 GMT -5
he was making little weeping sounds, but i didnt see any tears.
|
|
|
Post by pantstheterrible on Jun 13, 2004 15:05:26 GMT -5
Then he wasn't crying. And I'm sure he had tears in his eyes at some points in the books, only to blink them back to appear tough. I'm sure I read that somewhere...
|
|
|
Post by *~Ginny~* on Jun 13, 2004 15:06:45 GMT -5
it was in OotP after Ron and Hermione became prefects....but it did really seem like he was crying...i thought he was
|
|
|
Post by pantstheterrible on Jun 13, 2004 15:13:11 GMT -5
And I wouldn't blame him if he did. I really liked that scene.
|
|
|
Post by Philosacratic on Jun 13, 2004 19:08:44 GMT -5
If a movie is bad enough, it sure can ruin a book LOL. A tainted memory. Once a movie is watched that's from a book, forever is your prespective changed.
That said, I don't think this movie "ruined" the book. I just don't think any HP movie could ever capture the mystique of the books... at least not today.
I now firmly believe that JK Rowling SHOULD have waited at least 15 years after the books were all finished before allowing movies to be made. By that time everyone would have read them and formed their opinions and images ... but they wouldn't be fresh in a person's head when the movie is out. I firmly think we'd all like these movies better -- and they would have been better versions -- if the movies had been filmed well after all the books were finished.
|
|
|
Post by Bellatrix Lestrange on Jun 20, 2004 7:04:53 GMT -5
Yes, I think she should have waited until the books were done, but...it wasn't bad.
|
|
Eowyn
Frequent Visitor
Posts: 330
|
Post by Eowyn on Jun 20, 2004 12:09:43 GMT -5
If a movie is bad enough, it sure can ruin a book LOL. A tainted memory. Once a movie is watched that's from a book, forever is your prespective changed. That said, I don't think this movie "ruined" the book. I just don't think any HP movie could ever capture the mystique of the books... at least not today. I now firmly believe that JK Rowling SHOULD have waited at least 15 years after the books were all finished before allowing movies to be made. By that time everyone would have read them and formed their opinions and images ... but they wouldn't be fresh in a person's head when the movie is out. I firmly think we'd all like these movies better -- and they would have been better versions -- if the movies had been filmed well after all the books were finished. Good point!
|
|
|
Post by Elvira J on Jun 21, 2004 5:30:37 GMT -5
I completely agree with disappointed. That movie was so horrible-even without the book it was rushed, choppy, and made no sense. $72 spent for 9 people to see that? God!
That's my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by pantstheterrible on Jun 21, 2004 5:59:25 GMT -5
Wow, you must have expensive movie tickets. I only payed four bucks.
|
|
|
Post by Bellatrix Lestrange on Jun 21, 2004 10:54:15 GMT -5
I paid three fifty.
|
|
|
Post by PetitePirate on Jun 21, 2004 20:59:40 GMT -5
five fifty. i feel gipped.
|
|
|
Post by Moony on Jun 22, 2004 0:45:48 GMT -5
How come there are like two million threads just like this talking about the third movie? if anyone cares what my opinion is just read one of them and in the meantime...EAT POPCICLES!...and I paid about seven 'cause that's the price in this state, where in the world did you cheapies see it?!
|
|
|
Post by pantstheterrible on Jun 22, 2004 11:30:36 GMT -5
Where I come from 4 is the price of student/senior citizens tickets, 6 is the adult price.
|
|
|
Post by Moony on Jun 22, 2004 13:29:36 GMT -5
i'm jelouse!
|
|