Harry Potter
Nov. 21st, 2002 01:25 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cellio![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
lefkowitzga
and 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!
Harry Potter
Date: 2002-11-21 11:05 am (UTC)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.
spiders
Date: 2002-11-21 11:13 am (UTC)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.
Re: Harry Potter
Date: 2002-11-21 11:14 am (UTC)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.
Re: Harry Potter
Date: 2002-11-21 11:29 am (UTC)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. :-)