|
20 Nov 01 - 06:45 AM (#596209) Subject: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Noreen Continued from BS: Harry Potter.
|
|
20 Nov 01 - 06:56 AM (#596214) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Noreen And Liz... the Quidditch captain, Wood, was rather nice, wasn't he? :0) Noreen |
|
20 Nov 01 - 08:54 AM (#596289) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Grab Noreen, what I missed was Hedwig. She's there, but she never gets named. And Harry doesn't talk to her either. :-( Nor do Scabbers the rat or Trevor the toad appear anywhere after the start. I'm looking forward to part 3 though, to see how they do Crookshanks the cat... Graham. |
|
20 Nov 01 - 11:40 AM (#596429) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Dave the Gnome I didn't feel qualified to join in the last thread but having read the Philosophers stone over the weekend and now being part way through the second book I can honestly say I am really looking forward to seeing the film on Wednesday night. I think I would have gone to see it anyway - anything with Alan Rickman, Robbie Coltraine and Zoe Wannamaker would get my vote anytime! BTW - I used to work with a bloke called Phil Officer - Honest! He looked like he could loose a stone or two...;-) Cheers DtG |
|
20 Nov 01 - 11:44 AM (#596435) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Dave the Gnome BTW - why was the book re-named the Sorcerors Stone in the states? If that has already been discussed my apologies - can someone point me at it? DtG |
|
20 Nov 01 - 11:48 AM (#596436) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: MMario One article I read said they didn't believe the american public would recognize the reference - and that "sorcerer" rather then "philosopher" would sell better. |
|
20 Nov 01 - 01:57 PM (#596531) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Noreen Not been discussed here, Dave. (Welcome to the ranks of the converted!) We thought it was sad that they changed it for the US. Tom (14) even had a letter printed in the Guardian about it- it seemed rather like 'dumbing down' for the American market, as if it was assumed that they wouldn't understand the concept of the philosopher's stone... Graham, my daughter too was miffed that Hedwig's name wasn't mentioned, and I thought they could easily have referred to Mrs Norris instead of 'Filch's cat' as they did at one stage- can't see that it would confuse anyone who hadn't read the books... And Scabbers was far too healthy looking! |
|
20 Nov 01 - 02:02 PM (#596538) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: sophocleese Cynical me, maybe they renamed it to sorcerer so they could get the fanatics out burning books and creating more interest in the book. OOps sorry, sorry, I shoudl bury that unworthy thought. We saw the movie on Sunday. I had as much fun watching my kids watch it as I did seeing it. An audible gasp of delight from them at the first sight of Hogwarts. I agree with anybody who says that it is not suitable for smaller children, like the three that sat in front of us, got bored and querulous, and were then removed from the theatre by their father. I liked Hagrid. Not quite as I imagined him but a substantial character in his own right. The movie suffered as all adaptations do in being compressed. Its pacing would have suited a television series better. Harry Potter has lovely smile. Hermione reminds me of my own daughter. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? |
|
20 Nov 01 - 02:30 PM (#596574) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: McGrath of Harlow The decision to call it a sorceror's stone was made by the book publishers, presumably on the assumption that American children are stupid. Thus demonstrating that Americisan publishers are sometimes rather stupid. (Though of course it's quite on the cards the bods in question were actually English.)
I was wondering if they adapted the actual text in the American edition and the American soundtrack as well. If they didn't it would have been confusing. And if they did it would have been nonsensical.
Not merely has there never been any tradition of people trying to discover "the sorceror's stone", the term "sorceror" is actually best defined as a magician who practices the black arts. Voldemort is a sorcerer all right - but it's not his stone, and he never gets it.
Maybe they might have done better to make it as a two part film, run back to back, so gaining a bit more elbow room. But I suppose they are thinking there are another six books planned (three still to be written/published). That's a lot of films over the next few years.
|
|
20 Nov 01 - 03:14 PM (#596602) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Clinton Hammond the eventual outcome is I believe to be 7 books and 7 movies... for 7 brothers or something... overall, I have to give the first an 8 or 8.5 out of 10... damn good piece of film! |
|
20 Nov 01 - 03:26 PM (#596612) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: GUEST,Lyle Rumor has it that the term "sorceror" was actually a mispelling on the part of the publisher. They meant to say Sorcha... Lyle |
|
20 Nov 01 - 03:47 PM (#596631) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Noreen Clinton, I believe it's one book for each school year that Harry's at Hogwarts. And to get back to music....! The school song begins: Hogwarts, Hogwarts, (My daughter could quote you the whole song, I'm sure. Anyone need the lyrics?!) |
|
20 Nov 01 - 04:01 PM (#596644) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: GUEST,McGrath of Harlow But by definition it hasn't got a shared tune.
It might be fun trying to get a rendition at a Mudcat gathering. The point is, it isn't supposed to be people just murmuring away tunelessly, the way they sometimes do at funerals, it ought to be people with clear ideas of what the tune should be singing against other people who all have equally clear but contradictory ideas.
Very Mudcattish, though perhaps more noticeably so in some of the BS threads. |
|
20 Nov 01 - 06:54 PM (#596785) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: SharonA Philosopher's stone? Hmmm... The word "stone" is also slang for "testicle", as is "ball". So I'm envisioning a "Philosopher's Stone" as Descartes' ball (not necessarily of wax!). "Sorcerer's Stone" definitely sounds like a better seller for us Yanks. |
|
20 Nov 01 - 07:22 PM (#596801) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: SharonA It was Descartes who talked about the ball of wax, wasn't it? |
|
21 Nov 01 - 04:09 AM (#597019) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Dave the Gnome Hey - A musical leaning to justify the thread! Anyone know the Monty Python Philosophers song?
Emmanuel Kant was a real pissant and very rarely stable Does Descartes figure in there somewhere? Cheers DtG |
|
21 Nov 01 - 04:46 AM (#597031) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: The_one_and_only_Dai Emmanuel Kant was a real pissant and very rarely stable Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy begger who'd think you under the table Sir David Hulme cout out-consume Schopenhauer or Hegel And Wittgenstein was a beery swine who could think you under the table There's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach ya 'bout the raising of the wrist... Socrates himself was permanently pissed... John Stuart Mill, of his own free will, On half a pint of shandy was particulary ill, Plato, they say, could stick it away, Half a crate of whisky every day Aristotle, Aristotle, was a bugger for the bottle, Hobbes was fond of his dram, And Renee Descartes was a drunken bart, I drink therefore I am... Yes Socrates himself was particularly missed... A lovely little thinker but a bugger when he's pissed. Thank you. |
|
21 Nov 01 - 04:48 AM (#597032) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: The_one_and_only_Dai Sorry, Line 4 should be: And Wittgenstein was a beery swine who was just as schloshed as Schlegel oops |
|
21 Nov 01 - 06:25 AM (#597063) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: AllisonA(Animaterra) McGrath wondered if the American publishers adapted the text for American readers as well. Put your mind at rest- my X2B works for a proofreading house that handled the first book. He would come home telling us about the sweet book he was proofreading (only a few chapters, they divvied up the thing among several readers)- and he was so glad that they were not being asked to "de-Britishize" it at all, just check for the usual spelling, punctuation, paragraphs and so forth. He thought our kids would like it and hoped he'd be able to find it once it was published... |
|
21 Nov 01 - 07:09 AM (#597087) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: McGrath of Harlow So the punters read through it wondering when this "Sorceror's Stone" is going to turn up - and it never does?
I'd have thought in a litigious society there might be grounds for some kind of lawsuit there. "I bought this book on the clear understanding that there would be a Sorceror's Stone in it!" |
|
21 Nov 01 - 03:07 PM (#597415) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: SharonA Come to think of it, the Richard Adams book about the rabbits doesn't have a ship in it, either, does it? |
|
21 Nov 01 - 03:18 PM (#597421) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Noreen But the point of the plot of the book, and the film, is that Voldemort is trying to get the Philosopher's Stone, to produce the Elixir of Life as he's a bit poorly... :0) So, has this changed in the US version? I don't get it. Sharon, that was the name of the place... *grin* Noreen |
|
21 Nov 01 - 03:32 PM (#597438) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: SharonA Noreen, I was just following up on McGrath's lawsuit idea: "I bought this book with the clear understanding that there would be a ship in it! And not one of those rabbits had down-feathers!!" |
|
21 Nov 01 - 03:38 PM (#597447) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: SharonA (I mean, we were talking about how us Yanks can't be expected to understand a British book title, weren't we?) ;^) |
|
21 Nov 01 - 04:18 PM (#597473) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: McGrath of Harlow No - the question was whether the publishers who asssumed that Americans are a bit thick were right or not. My assumption is that they weren't right. But then I'm judging by the Americans I've met, face to face and via the net.
And the analogy there doesn't really work Sharon, because there is a Watership Down in the one book, and there isn't a Sorceror's Stone in the other. It was a bit as if they'd changed the name of the play Othello to O'Reilly, but still called the character Othello. A messy compromise.
In fact I suspect there were probably people in the publishers in England making exactly the same dumb suggestion about how children here wouldn't understand the word Philosopher. They just lost the argument.
Since several publishers turned the book down, it is pretty clear there are some pretty stupid people in the publishing business in this country too. |
|
21 Nov 01 - 05:06 PM (#597498) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Celtic Soul The reason they changed the name is that they thought that the term "Philosophers Stone" would not be understood to mean something like "Alchemists Stone" (which would have been a better choice for the American public than "Sorcerors Stone"), but would be implicitly understood by the British (for whom she wrote the book to begin with). I believe you Brits do use the term "Philosopher" to also mean "Alchemist", yes? In any case, "Philosophers" this side of the big pond aint got no magic in 'em, and that is why they changed it. The books *and* the film this side of the big pond have alterations to reflect this. The *only* thing that is changed is that, wherever the words "Philosophers Stone" appear in the British version, the words "Sorcerors Stone" appear instead in the American (and Canadian???) version. Other than that, they should be entirely identical. They did have to shoot all scenes that included these terms *twice* to accomodate the difference...what a great lot of effort for something so small, but c'est la vie. :D |
|
21 Nov 01 - 05:24 PM (#597513) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: McGrath of Harlow I believe you Brits do use the term "Philosopher" to also mean "Alchemist", yes?
No - no difference whatsoever in the way the words are used on the two sides of the Atlantic in this context. Just a difference in the extent to which the publishers gave credit to the public to be open to learning an odd use of a word. Essentially it was an expression of contempt towards American children, and American adults. By American publishers.
Now if they'd turned it to "the Alchemists Stone", it might have made some sense. But that's a "difficult" word too isn't it?
|
|
21 Nov 01 - 05:55 PM (#597529) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: SharonA Okay, McGrath, I used a poor example to try to make a joke out of. It's the only one I could think of, off the top of my (thick) head. Sorry! |
|
21 Nov 01 - 07:48 PM (#597594) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Dave the Gnome Just back from seeing the celuloid version. Well worth the effort! Couple of really odd things I noticed. The Brazilian Pyton had been changed to Burmese and the Greek bloke that Hagrid bought Fluffy (Kerberus) off had become Irish! Better stop now - my geekiness is showing - and my tea is getting cold! Anyway - GO AND WATCH IT (make sure you read the book as well though) Added bonus - full LOTR trailer. Can't wait. Cheers DtG |
|
21 Nov 01 - 09:36 PM (#597637) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: McGrath of Harlow I noticed the python - I thought maybe it was to give him a chance of getting home overland, though it's a long slither.
But I think it's more likely because there aren't any pythons in Brazil. They probably though some snake freak would come down on them for it. (And they were probably right on that.) Whereas Burmese pythons are apparently the biggest sort. Here is more than you probably want to know about pythons. (The big snake in Brazil is the Anaconda, which isn't a python.) |
|
22 Nov 01 - 01:25 AM (#597738) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: DonMeixner I just saw the film and thoroughly enjoyed it. Some compression was obvious to me but it was a visual treat thats for sure. Robbie Coltrane will some serious award nods I bet. The kids were great. Now to read the book and see where it was compressed from. John Cleese as "Nearly Headless Dick" did I catch that name correctly??? And the gnome at the bank, was that Hume Cronin??? Don |
|
22 Nov 01 - 04:48 AM (#597777) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Dave the Gnome GNOME AT THE BANK!!!! That was a dirty smelly Goblin I'll have you know! Us Gnomes don't need banks as we bury all our gold. Tsk.Tsk. Insult me would yer... Neary Headless Nick is played by John Cleese btw. Vernon Dursley was Richard whsasisname who played Swelter the Chef in the recent BBC adaptation of Gormaghast and hes wife looked, at times, like the actress who played Irma Prunesquallor in the same production. Anyone know if it was? Cheers DtG |
|
22 Nov 01 - 08:19 AM (#597788) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: GUEST Perhaps the decision to use sorcerer's stone might be associated with the Disney film which uses the word sorcerer in the title. In other words, publisher PR hacks may have decided the American children's market was already accustomed to the word sorcerer because of what came before. Just a guess. |
|
22 Nov 01 - 09:02 AM (#597797) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: McGrath of Harlow Fiona Shaw was Mrs Dursey, and Richard Griffiths was Mr. |
|
22 Nov 01 - 11:28 AM (#597834) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Dave the Gnome Yeah!!! Right on both counts then! Bit wierd init? Both Dursey parents played by ex-Gormanghasters. Oh-oh. Just realised that my anorak is showing. Mmmmm. Must take more beer;-) Cheers DtG |
|
22 Nov 01 - 01:01 PM (#597849) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Clinton Hammond Y... they're trying to get something GOOD on their resume after that piece of crap Gormandhgast!!! |
|
22 Nov 01 - 01:50 PM (#597858) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: McGrath of Harlow I'd sooner describe it as flawed, but brilliant. |
|
22 Nov 01 - 05:27 PM (#597889) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Dave the Gnome Bit like me really... |
|
23 Nov 01 - 07:48 AM (#597988) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: DonMeixner Sorry Dave, A self respecting gnome would not want to be associated with goblins even in the best neighborhoods. Anorak? I thot that was something only Dick Francis characters wore. Don |
|
23 Nov 01 - 06:51 PM (#598140) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: McGrath of Harlow Anorak - in England that means a sort of geek who spends time obsessively on some types of outdoor activities, like trainspotting. The NRA would count as a bunch of anoraks I think.
Gnomes have quite a hard time of it in the second Harry Potter book. |
|
29 Jul 03 - 09:27 PM (#992984) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Cluin News out about the next Harry Potter film, due in summer or 2004: Sirius Black to be played by Gary Oldman (I thought Jude law could've done it pretty well too), Remus Lupin by David Thewlis, and all accounts say Michael Gambon will be the new Dumbledore. I'd like to see Rowan Atkinson worked into the cast too. At first I thought he might make a good Peter Pettigrew, but now I think I'd rather see him as Mad Eye Moody. Besides, Timothy Spall is cast as Wormtail. Just some thoughts... |
|
30 Jul 03 - 11:03 AM (#993391) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Wesley S Thanks for the news. Gary Oldman should be great. |
|
30 Jul 03 - 11:16 AM (#993404) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Nigel Parsons It shouldn't be Gary Oldman: John MacEnroe applied for the role, but was told by J K Rowling "You Cannot Be Sirius!" Nigel |
|
30 Jul 03 - 11:30 AM (#993421) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Steve Parkes So where does Basil Brush come into it? |
|
31 Jul 03 - 10:09 AM (#994154) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Leo Condie that feller who plays oliver wood frequents the same open mic night that i occasionally pop along to...did a rather fine rendition of "the final countdown". |
|
31 Jul 03 - 11:41 AM (#994222) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Cluin I thought that guy was a pretty good young actor. Lots of charisma. The camera seemed to like him anyway. |
|
31 Jul 03 - 03:14 PM (#994416) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Leo Condie seemed a tad wooden to me. but i'm terribly good at making up flaws. |
|
27 Nov 03 - 03:13 AM (#1061827) Subject: RE: BS: Harry Potter, term 2 From: Cluin Site for the Prisoner of Azkaban movie due out next summer. There is a (Flash) wanted poster there with Gary Oldman as Sirius Black, as well as a viewable teaser/trailer for the new film. Plus some production still photos at here. |
