cellio | Harry Potter

Entry tags:

movies,
restaurants

Harry Potter

Last night we joined

tangerinpenguin for dinner at PF Chang (very good!) and Harry Potter (ok).

Food: PF Chang is apparently a chain, and they have some "signature" dishes. One of these is the "lettuce wraps", which are sort of like moo-shoo but with lettuce instead of pancakes. We got the vegetarian ones and they were very good. The "ma-po tofu" was also very good, with a tasty sauce that was not especially hot. (I would like to learn to cook tofu like this, and I don't know what the secret is to get pieces that are firm, almost "crispy" on the edges, and thoroughly cooked.) We also had the baked fish (tilapia, yesterday) with ginger. Mmm, ginger. The carnivores at the table ate two other dishes that I can't comment on.

Movie (without spoilers): It had some very funny bits (including a great one at the very end of the closing credits). Technically and acting-wise, it was pretty well-done. It was entertaining. It was not as good as the first one. And it had some character behavior that was either nonsensical or insufficiently justified; I gather it's the same in the books, which I have not read. So overall, it gets an "ok" from me.

I can suspend disbelief pretty easily for most things -- technology, alien worlds, magic, alternate history, even hard sciences to a degree. Just show me the ground rules of the story's world, and I can roll with it (even Star Trek, most of the time). But I've found that I cannot hold out against characters who behave in ways that do not fit with their characters as we've been given to understand them. I can't easily suspend disbelief about behavior. And in this movie, either some key characters (one in particular) behaved nonsensically, or their motivations were not sufficiently explained.

Ok, why is Dumbledore being so hands-off when there is a clear danger to the school and its inhabitants and it's pretty darn obvious that he knows Potter is up to something? He invites Potter to 'fess up, not once but twice, but does nothing when Potter fails to do so. The movie gives no motivation for that behavior at all. It wouldn't have been hard: I could accept, say, a geas that prevents him from providing help uninvited. I could also accept the behavior if combined with any sort of "what was I thinking?" moment later in the movie. But we didn't get anything like that. This is my big complaint with the plot, though there are also some smaller-scale issues of this sort.

Err, we're supposed to accept an entire stadium full of wizards who can clearly see that something dangerous is happening in the quiddich match, yet none of them so much as calls a time-out (let alone zapping the errant ball)? Maybe quiddich simply needs to be better motivated in the movies.

And then there's Haggart. What exactly was the point of sending the kids into the spider den? The spiders made it clear that they owed allegiance to Haggart but no one else; did Haggart not know that when he sent them in? (I thought this part of the story was pretty pointless anyway; they did not learn anything useful from the spiders and it took up quite a bit of screen time.)

And finally (for now, anyway), doesn't the HR department require a portfolio presentation, or at lease a reference check, before hiring a professor? Sheesh. :-)

Short takes:

That phoenix is pretty cool!
That poor owl -- not even a seat belt. :-)
How did they do the elf? Was it a puppet, or CGI, or what? It worked well as comic relief. The part at the end was fun.
I was surprised to see Haggart with a fairly normal pet, after last time.
"Can you tell me?" "Yes." Perfect.
I take it that Hermione is similar to Jason Fox in her attitude toward school. :-)
Oh, and this was definitely a much classier grade of commercials than I was used to. The trailers were a mixed bag (there's some animated thing coming up that looks really, really stupid). But no LOTR trailer! There was supposed to be an LOTR trailer!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

The hands off thing was also present in the book. Dumbledore doesn't seem to be much in the way of a hands-on administrator in general. I wasn't particularly bothered by this in the film because i'd already read the book.

Hagrid also had Fang (his big, slurpy dog) in the last film. I'm dying to know what breed(s) they use because i'm just totally enamoured with Fang's face. He has a sweet face. Then again, I love Bassett Hounds and find Bloodhounds cute..I think it's the drool.....

As far as the spiders, this is also insufficiently explained in the book. My assumption is much as Harry and Ron's was - they were friends of Hagrid's, therefore would receive special treatment from the spiders. I don't think that Hagrid would ever get them in a dangerous situation like that on purpose, he is stupidly trusting.

In general, this was my least favourite of the HP books. There was a lot of inconsistancy, and a seeming reach for another return of Voldemort. The third and fourth books are much richer in terms of plot, characters, and universe building.

I'm glad that you had a good time at P.F. Chang's. Even for a chain, I really like their food - especially the wraps. I can look into some cooking data to see how you can do the magical firm nearing crispy thing with tofu, i've been trying to work that one out myself. I'm also sorry that Ray and I couldn't join you, but we were kicking major butt with "We Be Three Poore Mariners" and "Denmark 1943" and starting on some of the instrumental stuff...and dropping my car off for inspection.

Fang: I forgot that he was in the first movie. I guess the baby dragon stole his attention. :-)

Voldemort: Yeah, I wondered about that too; seemed a reach. Is this going to become a running theme -- a new and different way to bring back Voldermort in each and every book/movie?

Sorry we missed you!

Is this going to become a running theme -- a new and different way to bring back Voldermort in each and every book/movie?

No, the running gag throughout the series is that there's going to be a different Defense of the Dark Arts teacher every year and Snopes will never get the job! :D Voldemort does NOT appear in "Prisoner of Azkaban" or "Goblet of Fire"

The elf was CGI, however the credits threw me for half a second when they gave the name of the actor who played him. It took me a few seconds to realize they were referring to the actor who voiced his lines! :D

The biggest problem I had with the movie was the car. In the book, it got totalled by the whomping willow. In the movie, it's animated and driving itself to rescue the boys. This was never properly explained

Voldemort does NOT appear in "Prisoner of Azkaban" or "Goblet of Fire"

Without wishing to give much away, that's not how I remember it.

In the book, the car did return to rescue the boys--it had gone wild from living in the forest.

Voldemort does NOT appear in "Prisoner of Azkaban" or "Goblet of Fire"

Not to give anything away, but this is extremely untrue.

Incredibly untrue in Goblet of Fire, that scene gave me the walking heebie-jeebies.

*shiver*

*Thwap!* *Thwap!* You're all right. I was wrong. That's why I logged back in to correct myself. Voldemore does re-appear at least one more time. I had forgotten the contest was rigged! Bad Elf! Must punish self! *Thwap!* *Thwap!*

I've gotten the edges crispy by frying each side. That's a major pain, but very tasty even with just soy sauce. I think some places deep fry it to get the crispy outsides, but I have no proof of that. Maybe I'll try that out and let you know. I think part of the trick is to use "just firm enough" tofu. The extra super-duper firm tastes nasty, I think, so I go for just "firm" and fry it in a pan.

Thanks. Maybe I'll try frying again. I've tried that before without much success, but maybe I used incorrect amounts of oil, or didn't have the pan hot enough, or something. (Any thoughts?) I also tried broiling it once, thinking that this would give me a "quick-crusty" effect, but it didn't.

Try first pressing the tofu (between 2 plates, with a weight on top) for a 1/2 hour or so to remove most of the water. Then fry in oil. This should work a bit better.

Boiling will change the texture so it becomes more chewy, as will freezing it.

Thanks; I'll try pressing it next time. (That never occurred to me. I drain it, but I've never pressed it.)

My tofu-crisping method:

- Place a block of firm tofu between two plates, and put a weight on the top plate. Press the tofu for 20-30 minutes to remove excess water.

- Cut the tofu into smallish pieces-- mine usually end up being about .75" x .75" x 1.5", I think

- In a wok, heat about 1/2-3/4" (variable on the size of the tofu pieces) of vegetable oil until very hot. Oil that isn't hot enough seems to cause the tofu to stick to the wok. I've tried doing this in a regular frying pan, also, and for whatever reason things came out much better with the wok.

- Fry the tofu pieces, turning as necessary, until golden brown all over. Cooking chopsticks are strongly recommended since the oil tends to spit a lot.

- Remove the cooked tofu and drain on paper towels

Thanks! I'll give that a try.

What a pretty kitty in your userpic!

Okay, I admit, I am sort of a freakish Harry Potter addict. Okay, no sort-of about it. First of all, bear in mind that the books are written for young adults... say... 10-12 years old. That so many adults have taken such a liking to it says a lot. I was really opposed to reading them and I was refusing to get swept up in the hype. Then I got the flu or something and a friend lent them to me. I read all 4 books in 3 days. They're great because kids (and adults, apparently) of all ages love reading the Harry Potter Books (though I would have been scared witless if I'd read these things when I was too small) and that's a beautiful thing. Kids that I knew that wanted nothing to do with reading are now voracious readers and it was the Harry Potter Books that got them started. J.K Rowling has an imagination that is unbelievable and she's got an amazing knack for tying details in a later book to an earlier book in a way that was clearly planned ahead of time. Some things, I'm guessing will not be explained until the next few books are finished (IF that ever happens)

That said....

none of them so much as calls a time-out
To the best of my knowledge, there are NO time-outs in Quidditch. I think this might be specifically stated in one of the books, but I may be wrong.

And then there's Haggart. What exactly was the point of sending the kids into the spider den?
Hagrid is pretty famous for not recognizing that vicious beasts are dangerous. He has a special knack for dealing with them and it never occurs to him that someone else might be in peril or afraid of the "cute cuddly gigantic man-eating spider." Hagrid, having never been harmed by the spiders probably never had it occur to him that the spiders, knowing that Harry and Ron were his friends, would be in danger.
As for what they got out of it, I disagree that they didn't learn anything. First of all, I believe that Hagrid was trying to clear up his role in opening the Chamber of Secrets. Second of all, the Spider (whose name is escaping me) told the boys that the girl that died 50 years ago died in a bathroom, which led Harry to realize that it might be Moaning Myrtle, which led him to realize that the Chamber must be in the Girl's Bathroom.

Some other thoughts, but I'm sure this comment is already too big for LJ not to reject. More in a minute.

Ah, you're right. I was mis-remembering where they had gotten that information. Ok, there was a plot reason to go there.

Thanks for the explanation of Hagrid's behavior. I can buy that easily; I just didn't see it in the character, so it didn't occur to me.

Oh, and getting kids to read is a Good Thing, yes.

How did they do the elf?
It was a CGI. It was very well done, in my humble opinion. I didn't expect that to be done so well.

"Can you tell me?" "Yes." Perfect.
Actually, it was "No"... "But I can show you."

I take it that Hermione is similar to Jason Fox in her attitude toward school. :-)
Um, I don't know who Jason Fox is. But Hermione thinks school is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

This is definitely the most nebulous of the four books, and as such, the movie was also somewhat nebulous. I definitely liked the first movie better, but I still definitely enjoyed this movie as well. I like them for what they are. They aren't great works of art, but they are cinematically (right word? I dunno) impressive and the stories are entertaining.

Anyway, now that you think I'm some psycho-freak, I'll be signing off.

Actually, it was "No"... "But I can show you."

I thought it was "Can you...", "Yes", "Will you...", and then "No, but". I was chuckling over the correct-but-useless answer to the first question. :-) (I occasionally answer "Can you tell me what time it is?" with "yes", too.)

Um, I don't know who Jason Fox is

He's the geek kid in FoxTrot who gets upset when tests are cancelled, or forgotten, or too easy.

And no, you're not a psycho-freak -- or at least if you are, I can't tell. :-)

All your criticisms hold true of the book too. Further spoilers:

- The Dumbledore problem is copied from the book, and equally unclear there.
- The Quidditch match: Quidditch has been explained as being a very dangerous sport. You may recall that there was a similar incident of things going wrong during Quidditch without intervention during the first movie.
- Hagrid and the spider den: Hagrid is pretty oblivious to danger, as we've seen before. It took me two readings of that section of the book to realize that they did get one clue from their visit to the spider's den: they learned about the death in the bathroom.

When I started this comment, there were no others. Now everything that I said has already been said.

In the book Dumbledor was doing lots and lots in the background to discover what was going on. He stepped on several toes along the way, which is part of the reason he was removed from his position as headmaster.

Harry & co were doing their thing on their own.

--

That was part of Lockhart's power. He wasn't a great defender against evil, he was a charmer.

--

As much as I like the books and the movies, it is one complaint I have, Ms Rowling has a tendency to move the plot along with coincidence and lucky guesses.

I had comments on this, but started rambling on and also was concerned about not being able to lj-cut spoilers in comments (before it occurred to me that anyone reading the comments would already be OK with reading your spoilers), so I put them in my own journal. (http://www.livejournal.com/talkread.bml?journal=tangerinpenguin&itemid=42086)

Dumbledore is the most powerful good wizard.... *except* for Harry Potter. However, Harry is totally naive, and needs to be brought up to speed quickly and well.

It's like juggling scorpions. Harry has to learn to be strong, and virtuous, and Dumbledore is walking a tightrope to make sure that happens without him turning Dark. He's got a lot of Slytherin/Voldemort in him. It lends him strength but is very dangerous.

Dumbledore has to look at the *big* picture, the entire story arc out to Book 7. Voldemort must be defeated at his full strength, and Harry will have to do it "on his own" (I'm sure he'll have the kind of loyal help Dumbledore has now, but it will be based on his own qualities).

(see above, I am married to Greyman) I think most of your plot questions have been answered. I would urge you strongly to read the books. We were determinedly holding out against the crowd until curiosity got the best of me in late August and I bought the first book. We were both immediately entranced and are now huge (or huge-ish, I can't speak for him) fans.

From the parent of teenagers point of view, I might can tell you what Dumbledore's reluctance might entail. I've always been very big, even on questions which entail danger, (and Dumbledore was never certain danger was present until the end when he might be required) on letting my children figure things out for themselves. I was always there if they needed me, but I have also known that I won't always be, and they need to solve their own problems. That's my take on Dumbledore. He's a hands-off guy unless someone is about to die. But, I should point out, it was his phoenix and his sorting hat which saved Harry. Dumbledore may not have physically been there, but he was instrumental in the rescue

The carnivores at the table ate two other dishes that I can't comment on.

*rant on*
Ok, this is one of those labels society uses that acutally irks me. We're omnivores, ok? Those of us that eat meat do actually eat vegetation as well, not just meat.
*rant off*

Now, granted, I do show ravenous tendencies at times towards slabs of animal flesh exposed to fire, and I'm acutally proud of this at times (I can be such a guy sometimes). I'm sorry if I sounded snarky at you, but I've discovered that's an issue that actually sets me off (which is rare, I think).

Now, onto:
But no LOTR trailer! There was supposed to be an LOTR trailer!

For that I am truly sorry. We saw the trailer and oh-my-dear-Lord. *drool* Can't wait to see it....

You're right; I used the wrong word. I apologize.

There was no dig involved, though; I eat meat too, after all. Just not in non-kosher restaurants.

And I forgot you eat meat for lunch, just not dinner (and the non-kosher thing, too), yes?

But (subject change? where??) aren't those lettuce wraps goood? :-)

And I forgot you eat meat for lunch, just not dinner (and the non-kosher thing, too), yes?

Oh, I'll eat meat for dinner -- at home or in friends' houses. But not in restaurants or at SCA events, where I have more of a choice in what I eat.

While I occasionally eat meat for lunch (and pretty much always on Shabbat), I end up mostly sticking with dairy/pareve during the day just to keep my options open. When the surprise cookies show up at the afternoon meeting, for instance, I'd like to not have to regret having eaten meat an hour earlier. :-)

But (subject change? where??) aren't those lettuce wraps goood? :-)

Oh yes! Good veggies and a wonderful sauce all at the same time! I like veggies. I don't get enough of them. I could eat those lettuce wraps all day. :-)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Harry Potter

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Bad Dagonell! Bad Elf! Must be punished!

Tofu

Re: Tofu

Re: Tofu

Re: Tofu

Re: Tofu

Re: Tofu

Harry Potter

spiders

Re: Harry Potter

Re: Harry Potter

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Dumbledore's approach to Harry

As my darling husband points out...

Carni- vs. Omni-, +LOTR

Re: Carni- vs. Omni-, +LOTR

Re: Carni- vs. Omni-, +LOTR

Re: Carni- vs. Omni-, +LOTR