Tim,

Actually I agree with just about everything you just wrote. I wasn't contesting what was actually filmed. My beef was with Cauron's comments about what certain things within his film "represented". After hearing his comments it sort of ruined the film for me.

My last post was more of a rebuttal to what I thought you meant, which was that even kids books/movies should have increasing adult content. I guess my point is that kids will eventually "grow up", and become adults anyway. Why not let them enjoy their innocence as long as they can? It's also refreshing to see that "some" kids films haven't been over run by sexual overtones, needless violence, and or gore. However, I digress. This is probably a debate best left for another message board, and another time.

- Josh

Josh,

I personally did not see strong, adult theme content. What adult theme content there was I found very subtle and very normal behavior for youngsters growing up. If anything, it was harmless and innocent in nature. You make it sound like Cauron was on the verge of making an X rated film, and I doubt very seriously that the story will turn into a Fox teen soap opera. If anything, the story’s are suppose to get darker, and as the characters grow older there will undoubtedly be more adult content to happen. Sure, the series may have been meant for kids, but even Rowling knows they are meant for “kids growing up”. The idea is that the younger kids start with the first book, and as they age, they read along and grow with the characters. The writer has even admitted to this herself.

Are Harry and his friends going to start taking drugs and having sex? I highly doubt it. But who knows, they eventually do have to become adults. Remember, these are not Disney movies, even though they may seem geared towards kids, there will still be an ongoing growth towards adulthood.

Personally, I actually know parents who will not let their kids watch the films because they deal with “witchcraft”. These parents, of course, are strong churchgoers. Amazing how something of the imagination can either scare or offend people.

Tim.

Tim,

I realize that the characters are growing up, and that you have to keep things "fresh". However, I think you can do that without making the leaps, or adult theme connections that Cauron made. The reason behind these books/movies existing isn't (and has never been) for them to turn into a different version of "Berverly Hills 90210", "The OC", or any other soap opera. These stories from their inception were meant for kids. This specifically is my beef with Cauron making the "adult" connections, or themes that he did. In my opinion, if he wanted to make an "American Pie" movie, he should have applied for that job.


Sean,

Awesome news on the new job! Well, I suppose, it's not so new anymore eh?


Onijay,

Your post is EXACTLY why people will forever say "the book was better" after seeing the movie translation of a book. It will never look like what you imagined in your mind. The director will have a different idea in his head of how things looked when he read the story, than it looked to any of us. Just as each person's account will vary person to person as well. I'm sure there are other avid "LOTR" junkies that thought "Peter Jackson" did a horrible job with all 3 movies comparitively to the books. Personally, I think they are a breakthrough in movie making history, equivelant to that of "Star Wars" influence.

- Josh ;)

I really hate to say it, but I find all three to be very corny, mostly becuase Daniel Radcliff delivers some pretty shoddy lines ("He was their friend! THEIR FRIEND!" Was the shouting necessary?), but Emma Thompson or whatever her name is, is great, it's almost like watching a teenage version of... actually she makes her own path through a slew of "she-seems-like" actresses, giving off her own distinct quality. I just think she's what makes the films more enjoyable (plus Dame Maggie Smith, she's really good too). I dislike the special effects and the other reason why I dislike the films is becuase I had pictures invisioned of really cool people as some of the characters, then when i see their real life counterparts, I don't think they stack up (reference to Professor Lupin, or Albus Dumbledore). Thats what I think anyways (I'm a LOTR fan myself)

Eddie,
Good isn't the new bad, but Sierra Mist is definitely the new Fresca...:o

Josh,
Well, I've been able to pop in here and there. Alot going on at work, but it's exciting. I'm now working for my church. Weekly, we produce 2 1-hour DVDs for our 1st-5th graders, so I am writing/directing/producing/acting every week! ROCK ON! Maybe that'll be a push for getting my movie made. Lots of shooting, lots of coordinating, but a great place to step off from!

Sean (just hope that next step's not a doozie!...):)

Yes, it may be considered a kids story but you need to be aware that the kids are growing up. As we come into Harry and his peer’s adolesnce period we are, unfortunatley for some peoples sake, going to see more and more adult content brought into the playing field. To me, this is what keeps the story fresh and interesting. Had the theme of the film still kept with the whole innocent childhood factor, I think it would make the film, and future films, seem redundant and stale. In other words, change is good.

Eddie,

I hear you. "Prisoner Of Azkaban" wasn't my favorite, but I did like it a lot. Certain aspects that Cuarón was trying to make connections with, and trying to turn it into some Freudian debate made me a little steamed, being that Harry Potter has always been a "kid's" story. In my opinion, there's just no need to bring in low brow or "adult" elements to an innocent kids story.

We'll have to see how "Mike Newell" does at the helm of "The Goblet Of Fire". With title's like "Monalisa Smile", "Pushing Tin", "Donnie Brasco" and an episode of "The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles" under his belt, I'm not sure what to expect from this next movie.

Or maybe J.K. will kill J.R.

Or Sister George. Or Burt Lancaster. (A buck to anyone who gets that connection.)

John

John,

I know this might be sort of a whacky idea, but maybe Rowling was just doing all of this to stir things up? To get people talking about the series again just like we are now. I doubt it, just because of how popular the "HP" books are on their own, but thats the only thing I can logically come up with, since I agree with you that it would be nutts to kill off any of the characters, let alone a primary one.


Eddie,

Nice. ;)

Josh,

The thing is, SOMEONE has to die in these books. After all, there is a war between good magic people and bad magic people. This isn't a blood-less feud. I don't think that people should be surprised at all by the deaths of important characters. In fact, having important characters die could add resonance to the series.

Eddie