Apologies for the post title; every time I see a Harry Potter movie, I find myself saying things like "git" and "bloody" and "What's all this, then?" for a couple of days.
Fish and I went to Harry Potter last night at this dinner and a movie theater somewhere around or near Downer's Grove (I'm sure Fish can fill in the details). It was really cool, you sit down and there's a menu there, you order whatever you want, and they bring it to you right before the movie starts. You can even get fancy frozen drinks and everything! I was amazed by this concept because Cleveland is lame and has no such theater that I'm aware of. I am told that this is fairly normal here.
The movie was good. Very good. The mistake I made was not re-reading the book just before we went. I did this before I saw the Lord of the Rings movies and it helped tremendously in my not being annoying to sit and watch a movie with. But I didn't think to do it this time, and so the ever patient Fish was bombarded with whispered "I don't remember that part" and "What house is Cedric in?" type comments throughout. My bad, Fish, sorry. Hermione, by the way, is growing up to be smoking hot. ("She's 14!" Fish pointed out. It's ok, I can wait.) Also Voldemort as played by Ralph Fiennes is terrifying. I didn't know who Ralph Fiennes was, of course, because that's the kind of thing I don't know. I don't bother to learn names of the actors I like; I just refer to them as characters from other films they've done. "So, you know Cy Tolliver [from Deadwood]?" I said to Fish recently. "He's the one bad guy from Tombstone!" Fish was kind enough not to roll his eyes at me.
"Voldemort was great," said Fish in the car on the way home. "You couldn't even tell it was Ralph Fiennes."
"Um, ok, I don't know who that is."
"Yeah you do; he was in the English Patient."
"Oh," I said. Then, "OH! Yeah, I know who he is. Dude, he TOTALLY looked just like the English Patient!" Because he did, he was all pale and hairless and missing parts of his face that seemed important, such as most of his nose, and it looked very similar to a burn patient. So I was happy about that.
I was also happy about the people watching, which was very funny. "Mullet, 9 o'clock," said Fish, and I turned to look. Lo and behold there it was in all it's mullet glory. Oh and perfectly white by the way. So as not to appear to be staring at the mullet guy, I kept turning my head and found something even better.
"White corn rows, 8 o'clock," I told Fish. And they were good too, not just braids going straight back on his scalp; these were some complicated abstract designs zig zagging around this dude's head. I thought it very K-Fed of him.
What I was not happy about was the other movie patrons. I mean, I know I have a reputation for not liking people, but I try to give them the benefit of the doubt even though I usually fail miserably. Such as the parents of all these school age and not yet school age children who have brought them to a 7:00 p.m. showing of a two and a half hour movie on a school night. Some of these kids were no older than three, and falling asleep in their parents’ arms before the theater even opened for seating. And I wanted to think that it was a once in a while, very rare treat for these kids to be out on a school night and not get to bed until after 10:00 because Harry Potter is special. But in my heart I know that's just not true.
That wasn't even a big problem though, because I recall no crying or talking children (small children anyway) during the movie. What I do recall is some girl who sounded like she was at least high school age and possibly older, SHRIEKING at the top of her lungs at a point of the movie which was not scary, but which was very quiet. Haha, hilarious, you little douche. I clenched my jaw, as I do, and tried to concentrate. The best was yet to come.
What's more annoying than some assjanitor who forgets to turn off their cell phone in the theater and lets it ring three friggin times before they silence it? How about actually answering the phone and then having a FULL VOLUME conversation in the middle of the movie! I was almost too amazed to even be angry; it takes some serious self-centeredness or a complete lack of social awareness to pull that one off.
Overall, though, I'd rate the experience as a success and recommend that everyone go see Harry Potter right away.
4 comments:
I saw the Thursday midnight showing of Harry Potter and loved it. I am glad I didn't read the book prior because I don't want to be one of those fans who complains because the movie isn't JUST LIKE the book. I have heard some fans complain because they left certain thing out...people the movie was 2 1/2 hours long, how long do you want it to be? 6 hours. Anyway I give it two thumbs up.
Mybelle, Th first part of the book, literally about the first third of it, is spent getting ready for and being at the Quidditch World Cup. It did nothing to advance the plot and was a great chunk to leave out. Other than that, it followed the book almost entirely, as well as you can in 2 1/2 hours. There's a difference between leaving things out from the book and departing from the storyline in the book, and it never did the latter. So you can tell all those crazies to shut up, from me, because it was awesome.
I have heard of that theater, Hollywood is it? Is it worth it?
they left out a lot but as you say it was almost all irrelevant to the main plot, except they didn't bring up the prize money or the fact that Harry gave it to the twins. That makes a big difference by book 6.
Dave, yeah I think that's the one. It's ok, not great food, but not terrible. The onion rings are excellent.
You're right about the prize money, but I think they can get away with just having the twins open the shop and not bother with where the money came from in a movie. That seems like the kind of thing that regularly goes overlooked in films.
Post a Comment