Harry Potter: Looking Back

(the title is supposed to be read with an English accent...I wish there was a way to write out an English accent)

Just a warning, this post has spoilers for people who live under rocks.

So, the final Harry Potter movie has been released in American theaters this weekend, and the Harry Potter franchise is finally over. For me, though, it really ended with the seventh book. The movies have been fun adaptions, but due to the lack of Daniel's ability to act, I found that I have not been taking the movies nearly as seriously as the books. However, I did not intend for this post to be a critique, so if you're one of those people who can't stand a single bad word about Harry Potter, you may read on.

I remember when the first book was released, and everybody had a copy of it. I was in lower school at the time, and I remember being curious about the book with the kid with glasses on the cover. He was flying on a broomstick and reaching out to catch a flying gold ball, and it said Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, so I assumed that the flying ball was the Sorcerer's Stone. IIRC, there was also a unicorn in the background. It did look interesting, and I remember it looking distinctly British. Half of my family is British, so growing up, I have read a bit of English fantasy and literature, and felt pretty comfortable with the writing style.

The Sorcerer's Stone does not have wings. Nor does it fly.

The interesting is, I have some sort of a mental blackout when it comes to reading the first three books. I remember seeing the first book and deciding to read it, but the next thing I remember, as far as Harry Potter goes, is buying the fourth one at Target after what I guess was a Harry Potter hiatus. But I remembered most of the characters, especially Sirius Black (I know people who loved him and people who thought he was annoying, but regardless of what you think about him, his name is very memorable). I remember enjoying the three tasks, Harry's friendship with Cedric, and FINALLY understanding how Hermione's name is pronounced. I remember being pissed off at Wormtail in the graveyard for betraying everybody, and feeling a dark cloud looming ahead when Voldemort came back.

After that, I reread everything, and I do remember it now. I remember thinking the first book was an enjoyable ride, the second book was a little annoying because of the number of times Harry gets in trouble, and the third book was the greatest thing ever written in Harry Potter history. I loved Lupin, Snape, Black, Crookshanks, and Trelawney. And the time turner! Oh, and Buckbeak, of course. Btw, does anyone know what happens to Buckbeak after Black dies? Does it say in the books?

"When I was twelve, I was just as much of a nobody as you are now!" 

Now, the movies were a slightly different matter. The first one was cute, and the second had its funny moments (Ron and Aragog cracked me up, and Kenneth Branagh as Lockhart was absolutely hysterical, especially during the duel with Snape), but the third film was wonderful. No, it did not stick to the book, and I have my qualms with it (WTF kind of patronus is Harry making? And werewolf? Ex-cuse me? More like a human-sized naked rat that walks on two feet), but overall, it captured the tone of the book better than its predecessors, I thought. And the soundtrack was great, especially the "Double Trouble" theme that gets introduced as the main theme of this movie as Harry arrives at Hogwarts:

Froggies!

The theme shows up all over the movie (check out the end credits if you don't believe me-- it's got basically every song mixed in there-- up until to 0:30, it's got the Mischief Managed theme in there, and pretty much after 0:35, it's all variations on Double Trouble).

After this movie/book, the series goes on a downward spiral of darkness. With Wormtail's escape comes the prospect of Voldemort's return, and with Voldemort's return comes the deaths of several people, along with Bellatrix showing up and killing even more people. The fourth book was another fun Harry Potter adventure right up until the very end, when the mood suddenly darkens.

And that was the last time Harry ever smiled until the epilogue. 

Skip this paragraph if you can't handle HP criticism:
The fourth movie, on the other hand, was probably the worst book-movie transitions in the whole franchise. One of the few things I highly approved of was Professor Moody; he played his role wonderfully. But the rest of the movie seemed to be a little scattered and hastily put together. Where was the quidditch match? Since when was Beauxbatons a girls school with only veela students? Why did Dumbledore act like such an ass when he found out that Harry's name was in the Goblet? Why wasn't the Norwegian Ridgeback properly tied down when Harry faced it? Where was SPEW? What was going on in that maze at the end? I get that they had to cut some things for the movie, but some of it was a little ridiculous.

Insert clever line about how Cedric Diggory is a vampire here.

Anyway, so then we get the fifth book/movie, where Harry PMSs for an entire year.  I'm glad that the movie people cut some of that out. We did not need to see 94802394802934820 temper tantrums. I was very pleased with Umbridge; the actress got her personality down to a T, in my opinion. Her expression, cats, and outrageously pink outfits were wonderful, and the montage of her "fixing" things at the school was priceless. No, she did not look like a toad, as described in the books, but she was perfect all the same.

"No, I don't think so, Mr. Potter," said Umbridge sweetly, poking him in the back with it. "The Ministry places a rather higher value on my life than yours, I'm afraid."

One thing that made her stand out, to me, was how different she was from almost any other character in the series so far. She certainly stood out from the other Dark Arts professors as being the cruelest (yes, Quirrell was evil, but as a teacher he was basically normal, and we're not going to count Moody/Crouch here for the same reason-- also, while both of them supported Voldemort, neither of them came across as sadistic, exactly, as opposed to just plain evil). One scene that I thought was perfect in the movie was the scene where Harry has to carve into his hand that he will not tell lies. In the middle of her office, surrounded by the mewing kittens, and after watching Umbridge spoon four lumps of pink sugar into her tea, she asks him if everything is all right, pointedly ignoring the blood on the back of his hand. At this point in the movie, you know that the the film people have her down perfectly. 

In the sixth book, of course, we have the unforgivable happen. I couldn't believe what happened when I read it, and I had to reread it several times to make sure that Dumbledore was, in fact, dead. It was *almost* balanced out by the scene at the end of the last quiddich match with Ginny and Harry. (awwwwwww) Still, though, I couldn't help but feel that the idea of an evil book that Harry finds and basically befriends was kind of tired at this point, and this book seemed to be a little reminiscent of Chamber of Secrets, despite the fact that yes, I know, it's totally different. Anyway, any Snape subplot at this point was fascinating, because I was six books into the series, and I still knew practically nothing about him. And, sorry, I just have to say it: I never thought he was bad. He was far too fascinating to be evil. 

Nice locket, Voldemort. I didn't know Salzar Slytherin frequented pawn shops.

Finally, we arrive at the Deathy Hallows. By this point, Harry Potter was no longer a series, but a mythology. There were so many spells, histories, cultures, terms, books, family lines, and characters that Rowling had created an entire world, similar to Tolkien, and developed it so thoroughly that it had caught on with almost everybody who read it, to the point where we understand that we are muggles, nobody uses the word "mudblood" casually, people dream of using "accio" in moments of laziness, and everybody knows that you pronounce wingardium leviosa with emphasis on the gar and the o.

"It's levi-o-sa. Not levio-sa."

Deathly Hallows gives us more of the mythology, with the story of the Three Brothers (although I personally am disappointed that I don't get to hear the story of Babbitty Rabbitty and her Cackling Stump), and the realization that Harry is actually descended from one of the brothers. Things from the very first book that you dismissed as trivial tie in to the resolution of the series: Grindlewald, the Golden Snitch (not, as I had previously thought, the Sorcerer's Stone), the house ghosts, the invisibility cloak, Gringotts (and Griphook), etc. It's impressive that even though some of those haven't even been mentioned since, we know exactly what it is Rowling is referring to when she writes, and she is able to make it all come together perfectly naturally.

The movie was pretty good, too. I'm glad it was split into two parts-- we had seen at this point that when the books got too fat, the movies began to dwindle in quality. Of course it didn't stick to the book, but I was mostly relieved to get a good wizard battle at the end. I wanted to see Mrs. Weasley kill Bellatrix, and Neville slay the mighty Nagini that had creeped everybody out since book 4. I was mildly annoyed that it didn't all happen in one big battle where everything was public, but at least Neville got his little moment in the form of a moving speech.

And, of course, I cried at the Snape scene. Just like in the book. When I read The Prince's Tale, I had a cut on my eyeball (long story) that resulted in me having to take a break every time I got teary, because it would really irritate my iris. When I got to that chapter, however, I covered up my eye and pressed on, bawling away. In the movie, I was worried that it wouldn't live up to expectations. After all, it'd been written so well, and built up so well to the scene where we see Snape's patronus. Of course, the scene in the movie that did it for me was Snape rushing up the house in Godric's Hollow and holding Lily, and crying. A wonderful example of "not exactly like in the book, but dead-on." Amazing. Snape, you are my hero, and Harry's hero, and Lily's hero.

*wiping tears from eyes, determinedly continuing to read*

I was pleased with how the film handled the epilogue. I managed to get through it without laughing/wincing, so that was nice. Scorpio. Heehee. Poor kid.

And then it was over. No more books, and no more movies shadowing the books. You know it's a good series when it's over and the first thing you want to do is read the whole series again. And it's stuck with me, like no other series. I feel like the characters are my friends, in a way. Fred and George were incorrigible, Lupin was so serious, and Sirius was so fun and crazy, and Hagrid was so sweet, Dumbledore was so wise, Malfoy was so obnoxious, and McGonagall just awesome. The names are so familiar that when I hear somebody named Ron, I assume he is probably a very funny person.

It truly is a series that I grew up with. I have always loved reading, and I've read so many books since first grade. But I reread this series faithfully every time a new book came out, plus some, and I laughed at the jokes and cried at the deaths as they came more and more rapidly. The first book came out when I was in first grade, and the last one came out two years before I graduated from high school, and I went to the same school for all twelve years. It's strange to think about, and a little sad. It's almost like since the series is finished, then I am finished growing up. I always looked forward to something new coming out, and now that's over. But that's how I know that I will never grow out of the series. Because I grew up with it, I can't grow out of it.  It's too ingrained in me at this point. That makes me glad.

"And now, Harry, let us step out into the night and pursue that flighty temptress, adventure." 

**************

Mischief Managed!

**************

My Embarrassing Monday

I had a very embarrassing day at work today, because it was a Monday. I will explain what happen today in order of embarrassingness:

1. I was delivering an envelope downstairs to a box that I don't really understand (I don't know where it goes or what it's for), but I always have to deliver papers there. I was walking by a desk and I heard a woman say, "you're my hero!". I knew this woman because I had talked to her once or twice on other, similar errands, so I turned around and laughed and said "thank you!" before realizing that she was on the phone. 

2. I went back that office ten minutes later because I had to deliver another paper to the same box, and when I was leaving, that same woman asked me if I needed the registrar's box, and I said no, and so she asked me what I was doing. "I'm here to put the paper in the box," I replied wisely. 

"That's the registrar's box," she said. 
"Oh," I said. "Then yes, that's what I was doing."

3. Later, I had to buy something from the bookstore for my department, and when I was signing the receipt with the name on the department credit card, I thought I was writing my last name for a minute, and the end result was what looked like a fifth grader writing MCONMA and a squiggly line for the last name (I didn't even bother thinking up letters for that part). The woman asked me if I wanted another receipt to sign, and I said yes please, but then I realized that she was kidding, so I pretended like I was, too.

4. Then, I had to deliver a form to the VP's office, so I went up there, and on the way out, I always pick up a piece of chocolate from the candy bowl that's always on the receptionist's desk. I reached out to take the candy, and my hand hit the table. I looked down to realize that the bowl wasn't there today, and I had just reached out to grab at an empty space on the desk. The woman behind the desk gave me a polite look and asked if I wanted the candy, and I kind of turned red and nodded and ran off. (I later realized that words would have been involved in the better response)

5. Finally, when I was heating up my lunch during my lunch break (still in my department office) I tried to open the microwave door, and I pulled the microwave off the counter and it fell on the ground. I picked it up and put it back and plugged it back in before anybody noticed, because thankfully, the people in the rooms closest to me were either on vacation or on lunch. The next woman to heat up her lunch had a little bit of trouble getting the microwave started, but I just sat at my computer and concentrated on writing, looking very innocent and oblivious. The microwave, in the end, did finally start.

Anyway, so now that I have been sufficiently humiliated, I think I will go home and sit down for a while and eat some expensive dark chocolate with Mayan spices and a hint of orange.

Anastasia is a Disney movie

I have gotten a lot of criticism over the years for occasionally calling Anastasia a Disney movie. It's always accidental, of course, but the response of others to this apparently egregious error tends to include a terrible, fiery lashing out of "that is NOT a Disney movie, it is TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX movie and we are NO LONGER FRIENDS."

*quickly goes to check and make sure that Anastasia is, in fact, a 20th Century Fox movie so that the internet doesn't break on account of this post*

Anyway, the point is, Anastasia is really a Disney movie. Here is why:

1. There is a princess (Snow White, The Lion King, Aladdin, I'm not going to list all of them)
2. There are songs (every Disney movie ever)
3. There is a funny sidekick (often fat) and a handsome guy who she ends up with (The silly fat mouse/Prince Charming, The three funny fairies, especially the fat one/Random Unnamed Prince, again, not going to list all of them)
4. There is a cute animal pet figure (the magic carpet, the squirrel who pops the balloon in the forest with all the jaguars, etc)
5. An old wise parent figure who never does anything goofy (King Triton, Mufasa, Tarzan's gorilla parents, etc)
6. A bad guy who is kind of ridiculous (Izma, Edgar, Cruella DeVil, etc)

Now, you might say, well, this happens in every movie! Every kids movie, anyway. In that case, let's take a look at the songs in Anastasia:

1. A Rumor in St. Petersburg (the song where the whole town dances where you get to know the setting of the movie: "Belle," "One Jump Ahead," etc)
2. Journey to the Past (a song about the main character's dream, or the "I want" song: "Part of Your World," "Go the Distance," etc)
3. Once Upon a December (the main character's token song that is unusually pretty and recurs often during the movie, often a love song: "Colors of the Wind," "When you Wish Upon a Star," etc)
4. In the Dark of the Night (catchy bad guy song: "Poor Unfortunate Souls," "Be Prepared," etc)
5. Learn to Do It (the fun song where things look like they will pick up: "Hakuna Matata," "Something There," etc)
6. Paris Holds the Key to your Heart (the last song sung by characters the movie, usually attempting to be cool because the moviemakers know that at this point, most of the songs that people actually care about have already happened, often mixed in with the previous type of song: "Good Company," "A Star is Born," etc)
7. At the Beginning (random song at the end sung by some token famous artist: "True to Your Heart," "You've Got a Friend in Me," etc)

Now, it's getting more difficult to distinguish Anastasia from the average Disney movie. Yes, the animation is slightly different, but it's very formulaic. If that's not enough, however, let's look at a specific song from Anastasia and this Disney classic (Anastasia came out a year after Hunchback of Notre Dame).

A Rumor in St. Petersburg

Topsy-Turvy

Even for "the song where everybody dances" songs, they are very similar. Rumor is a bit more melodic, while Topsy-Turvy is more chaotic, but they have remarkably similar refrains. They also both contain:
1. Character/plot development during breaks in the song
2. Huge crowds of people dancing, people dancing in circles
3. A cathedral in the opening, as well as a grand instrumental introduction



So anyway, I am quite certain that the makers of Anastasia deliberately followed the structure of a Disney movie in hopes that it would make this movie more successful (which it did, IMO), and if that is your method, then you deserve to have your movie occasionally mixed up with whoever you're copying. You could even see it as a compliment. Imitation is the best form of flattery, right? And no offense, Fox, but based on the sheer number of successes, Disney is much better at this kind of thing than you, even if you did get this one hit.  But since it is so obviously based on a Disney classic formula, then I see nothing wrong at all with people occasionally mixing it up with a Disney movie. If they wanted to make it different, they would have made it different.

But they didn't, and in not doing so, they cursed themselves forever. Point is, if I mix them up, it's not my fault, it's theirs. Because Anastasia is, in essence, a Disney movie.