Tags

, , ,

Ok, so I like Harry Potter. I’ve read the series many times and while I don’t get all caught up in the hype of the movies, I generally expect them to have some semblence to the original story.

I saw Half Blood Prince today and while you obviously can’t include every single detail from the books, surely it’s not too much to expect vital plot points to be included and explained properly? I don’t want to say too much so as not to spoil things for those of you who may still be wanting to check out the film, but I will say that, not content with merely leaving out major plot details, they’ve also started to invent things as well! In addition to leaving out a whole heap of important information, they included quite a long scene at the Weasley’s house which never occurred in the books and which didn’t add anything to the lame watered-down version of the story that they were telling.

I know that movie adaptions of books are never going to be as good as the written version, and can never include all the background information that you absorb so readily from the page, but I wonder sometimes why they even bother. The movie versions of Dan Brown’s books are a classic example – I enjoyed reading The Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons, but found the films pretty bloody ordinary, rushed and missing important connecting links that left gaping holes in the story. The only film that I can think of that does its written version justice is Kenneth Branagh’s adaption of Shakespeare’s Much Ado About Nothing – can you think of any?

Save Ginny Weasley – Harry and the Potters

Advertisements