Identity

“Tell me a little bit about yourself.”

Chances are, at some point in your life, you've been faced with that daunting statement. Maybe in a job interview, on a blind date, or simply meeting a person for the first time. If you're like me, you hate that question, because it's not really a question, is it? It's a command, an imperative, and one that doesn't lend itself to easy response. How are you supposed to respond to something like that? What do you tell, what do you keep private?

It's not really that horrible of a question, of course, but it does bring up a mini identity crisis of sorts. How you answer this question tells people how you define yourself – what is important to you. So do you tell people about your job? Your kids? Your army of cats? Your huge collection of Star Wars memorabilia? The real question they're asking isn't about getting to know you better – it's about your identity – you you define yourself.

Identity is a topic I've been thinking about quite a bit for the past month or so. My NaNoWriMo (go here: www.nanowrimo.org to learn more) novel this year was all about identity. In my (still untitled) novel, the protagonist, Shannon Sparrow, stirs up major controversy in her small Kansas town when she comes out as a lesbian at the start of her senior year of high school. Shannon struggles with her changing identity – or, at least, what her classmates view as her identity. For Shannon, being a lesbian is part of who she is, but it's not everything that defines her. She's editor of the school newspaper, gets good grades, babies her cat, Sargent Pickles, and can't wait to get out of Kansas for college. If asked to talk about herself, she wouldn't define herself as a lesbian, anymore than I lead all my introductions with “I'm Erinn, and I like men.”

But Shannon does struggle with her identity throughout the course of the novel. She doesn't want to be an activist for the LGBT community, but it happens anyway. She struggles with wanting to just be a normal teenager and needing to stand up for herself against the discrimination and hatred she faces. Shannon has to redefine how she sees herself, because her classmates have redefined how they see her.

When I made identity a central issue in my novel, I didn't really realize it was also an important issue to me. My whole life, I've defined myself by what I do. In high school, I defined myself as a robotics team member and softball player. In college, I was the Wildlife and English major who volunteered at the zoo. And now, I'm the Education Curator at Tanganyika. It's never been about who I am as a person – I've always based my identity around the things I do.

We all define ourselves by our activities to an extent, I think. What's one of the first questions you ask when you meet someone? “What do you do?” We want to know about each others activities, because our work, hobbies, etc tell us about a person. You can learn what a person values by finding out what they do with their time. It's not polite to lead a conversation by asking about someone's deeply held beliefs, especially if you don't know a person well. I know how my close friends feel about tons of hot-button issues, but that's not how our friendships started. Friendship should be based on core values – shared or at least a respect for differences – but that takes time.

But who am I, really? I work very, very hard. I put in tons of hours, bring my work home with me, and often have time for little else besides work, dinner, and bed. This past season, I had perhaps five or six weekends (Saturday and Sunday) off of work – and two of those were vacation weekends I specifically took off. I had fewer than a dozen weeks with two full days off. More often than not, I would have one or no days off in a week. I think my longest stretch without a full day off was something like 50 days. I work very hard to be good at my job, so it's naturally a huge part of who I am.

But if you took away my job, what would I be? How would I describe myself? There are things I like to do, to be sure, when I have time for them. I love to read (as evidenced by this blog), write (as evidenced by NaNoWriMo), and bake. I'm not as up to date as I'd like to be on updating this blog, but I feel like I never have interesting things to say. Or, to put it another way, I don't feel like anyone cares. Not true, I'm sure, since I do get page views, but I need more motivation than that.

So I made a vow/resolution type thing to myself this week: I'm going to do more things that I like. That shouldn't have to be something you resolve to do. It should just happen naturally. But for me, it doesn't Justin always says that I don't know how to relax, and that's completely true. I've spent all day feeling uncomfortable because I don't have any obligations. Pumpkins is over, NaNo is done for the year, and I didn't have anywhere to be. But I had a hard time just sitting on the couch, watching TV, and reading. That's supposed to be easy.

Anyway, part of this “doing things I like” kick I'm on involves updating this blog a lot more often. So, let me know in the comments if there's anything in particular (literary-related or not) that you'd like me to discuss. Another part of this plan involves another blog I started: Pearl's Sweet Treats (http://pearlssweettreats.blogspot.com/). If you're so inclined, feel free to head over there and follow my adventures in baking.

So, dear readers, I'll leave with a question: How do you define yourself? What is your identity?

Mischief managed,

Slim Pearl Silver-Feather

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2

Well, my last Harry Potter midnight release experience is behind me, and I think I'm finally ready to talk about it. I knew, going into Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2, that I was in for a roller coaster ride from beginning to end and, for the most part, Yates and company didn't disappoint. After the amazing job Yates did with Part 1, I was so sure that Part 2 would be just as good. While I enjoyed the film, and thought most of it was perfect, there was something missing for me. I think, as with the last film, I'll just make a running list of my observations. It probably goes without saying, but there will be spoilers, so read at your own risk. As usual, I have a lot to say, and I hope you enjoy it!

General Observations

Dumbledore's Backstory

I really wish they had decided to keep more of Dumbledore's backstory in the final film (well, the final two films, really). One of the things I liked about Harry's quest in the book was his attempt to figure Dumbledore out. Harry spent so much time obsessing over Dumbledore's past, his motivations, his intentions towards Harry, and, ultimately whether it actually mattered. I loved that, at the end, Harry basically threw away all his misgivings about Dumbledore and realized that destroying Voldemort's Horcruxes was his job, whether or not Dumbledore should have pushed him into the task or not.

We definitely got a glimpse of that in the film, but it was just a glimpse, not the full picture. When Harry tells Aberforth that he, Harry, trusted the Dumbledore that he knew, it just lacks the same emotional weight I got when reading the book. I feel like some of the details are lacking, and adding in a throwaway line or two about Ariana doesn't add up to the same impact that the book had.

Voldie and his Horcruxes

I don't know about you, but I liked the idea of Voldemort's soul being so damaged that he had no clue when his Horcruxes were destroyed. To me, that conveyed an image of a totally broken man, to not have any idea when bits of your soul are being destroyed. In the film, Voldemort's moments of realizations made for good dramatic tension, but I think it took something away from Rowling's commentary on just how torn a soul could be.

The Malfoys

I've been incredibly impressed with the performances by Helen McCrory, Jason Isaacs, and especially Tom Felton over the past three films. For Lucius and Narcissa, it's no longer about purebloods ruling Muggles and mudbloods; instead, they only care about staying on Voldemort's good side (or, at least, his not-being-murdered-horribly side) to preserve their lives. In short, they are Slytherins. McCrory and Isaacs do such and amazing job – McCrory's Narcissa worrying so deeply about her son that she lies to Voldemort in the Forbidden forest and Isaacs' Lucius looking haggard and careworn as he tries to make everything “as it was.”

But, above all, Tom Felton has blown me away. His Draco is perfect – arrogant, hateful, and offensive in the first five films to scared and helpless in Half-Blood Prince. In Deathly Hallows, Felton gives a wonderfully nuanced performance that really captures Rowling's Draco perfectly. Draco is in over his head – he might have meant what he said in Chamber of Secrets, but actually being a Death Eater was a bit more than Draco could handle. Couple that with being used as a pawn to punish Lucius for his failures, and you wind up with a scared young man that feels like he doesn't have any options. Tom Felton is brilliant. Period.

Shell Cottage

Griphook

I'm so, so glad that Warwick Davis finally got to act! He does such a great job as Griphook, both at Shell Cottage and in Gringotts. I think the filmmakers perfectly captured Griphook's simultaneous contempt for wizards in general and his dependence on Harry for survival.

Hallows v. Horcruxes

I thought it was interesting that Yates seemed to downplay the Hallows v. Horcruxes debate so much. For book-Harry, Shell Cottage was a turning point. If he questioned Griphook first, he would hunt Horcruxes; talking first to Ollivander meant he would chase Hallows. He, of course, comes to the relatively easy decision to go after Horcruxes, to continue chipping away at Voldemort's lifelines. However, movie-Harry doesn't seem to make a decision at all. For him , Horcruxes are always the primary goal.

I think that book-Harry's indecision and eventual choice are very telling about his character. To choose Horcruxes as his target is the brave way of self-sacrifice. Harry knows he must continue to risk life and limb to put Voldemort one step closer to death, that the remaining Horcruxes will not be easy to get, but he also knows the prize will be well worth the sacrifice. On the other hand, Harry could choose to go after the Hallows. To unite all three would make one master of death, and potentially preserve his life whilst hunting down the remaining Horcruxes. If Harry chose Hallows first, Voldemort's terrible rein of terror would continue a little longer, but, assuming he could unite the Hallows, Harry would be well-protected, both against Voldemort and against any future threats. In the end, a Gryffindor through and through, Harry chooses Horcruxes and self-sacrifice over Hallows and personal protection and glory. Difficult though I know it would have been to include, I wish this thought process would have been included in the film.

Ollivander

John Hurt is awesome, and quite haunting, really, as Ollivander. I did, however, think it was very interesting that they chose to use the Trio's interview with Ollivander as a “previously, on Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows” segment to re-introduce what the Hallows were (because, naturally, we've all forgotten a very major plot point from the first film by now).

Gringotts/Hogsmede

General Thoughts

In general, I liked this pair of scenes. The deviations from the text that existed didn't make all that much of a difference to me, since (as Yates has done so well before) the feel of the thing was captured so well. I felt the right amount of urgency in Gringotts and in the streets of Hogsmede, so why be bothered by some (relatively small) differences?

Helena Bonham Carter

Probably my favorite comedic moment from the film (possibly even the series), was Helena Bonham Carter's performance as Hermione/Bellatrix. The look on her face as she walks over the sand dunes at Shell Cottage is fantastic. That must have been so much fun to film!

Good thing Harry can hear Horcruxes!

I found myself thinking this several times during the film. That's right, Yates, perhaps you should have tried to include more of the Pensieve memories in Half-Blood Prince, so you wouldn't have to figure out a work-around to help Harry find the remaining Horcruxes. Oh, and apparently sentient Horcruxes can sense each other? Good thing Nagini didn't bother to mention this to Voldemort, or Harry would have been screwed.

Voldemort's Reaction

So I know Voldemort is super angry after finding out Harry's got his hands on Hufflepuff's cup, but oh my word, I could not believe how horrifying that scene was in the film. Yates pulled no punches, and I loved it.

Aberforth

I'm not sure exactly what I was expecting from Aberforth, so I don't know if I'm happy or not with how that whole business played out. It's not that it was bad or anything – Aberforth was gruff with the Trio, harbored obvious anger and resentment towards his brother, and, ultimately, gave Harry the help he needed – however much he begrudged giving it. I suppose this is one of those instances where I felt like the film was missing something. I don't know how it could have been better, necessarily; I just felt like it wasn't quite right.

Sirius' Mirror

There are a great many things in movie-Potter-world that the filmmakers ought to have included earlier on but chose not to. Many of these things actually turned out to be important (like Harry learning what the other Horcruxes were, for example), while others simply would have provided extra information (like Dumbledore's backstory). And, to be frank, we've been retconned a whole hell of a lot in the last several films. It's as if the writers/producers/powers that be said “Oopsie, we ought to have included Thing X three films ago. How can we get our plot to where it needs to go without providing appropriate context?”

Usually, these enormous leaps in intuition/knowledge (like learning Apparition, Harry hearing Horcruxes, and figuring out who RAB was) bother me, but most of the time, I can gloss over them as a necessary evil of adapting a large book series into films. But this mirror thing, I just can't get past it. So, we're led to believe that Harry – for some bizarre and unknown reason – picked up a shard of broken mirror from 12 Grimmauld Place, probably at some point during Order of the Phoenix (since he has it at the beginning of Deathly Hallows, and hasn't been back to OotP headquarters since before Sirius' death) and has been carrying it around for several years? And he intuitively understands what the mirror does and recognizes where it came from when he sees it in the Hog's Head? I don't really buy all of that.

Battle of Hogwarts

Harry / McGonagall Exchange

Somewhat surprisingly, one of my favorite parts of the book is the exchange between Harry and Professor McGonagall in the Ravenclaw common room. I love the way Harry defends his former Head of House, and I think his use of an Unforgivable Curse really underscores his transition from boy to man (because using the Cruciatus Curse shows Harry means business). I also love the pride McGonagall shows when she tells Carrow that Harry belongs in her house. While the film didn't include this exact scene, I think what they did choose to include captured a very similar feel. Especially McGonagall's typically curt-yet-emotion-laden “I missed you.”

Harry v. Snape

I thought it was very interesting that the filmmakers chose to include a confrontation between Harry and Snape within Hogwarts. By the time we get to the Battle of Hogwarts, we ought to understand that it's not about Harry facing anyone but Voldemort. All of the other things Harry goes through during Deathly Hallows are just to get to Voldemort. So, to some extent, these smaller confrontations don't really matter, since they're all leading up to the one fight that does matter. I think that's why Rowling didn't put in a confrontation between Harry and Snape in the novel. Why bother rehashing the whole “you killed Dumbledore, you bastard!” argument when she was that close to revealing the truth? Snape isn't the bad guy here – Voldemort is, so Rowling chooses to focus on the antagonist that matters.

I wonder, though, if the filmmakers were trying to make up for the lackluster Harry/Snape confrontation at the end of Half-Blood Prince (you know, where “Flight of the Prince” becomes “The Prince's Leisurely Stroll”). As much as I enjoyed that film, I felt they didn't focus enough on Harry's anger towards Snape (not to mention the part where they completely left out the “battle” aspect), and this may be their way of making up for that.

Why didn't they send underage students away?

The book made such a big deal of getting all underage wizards away from the castle before the battle began, I was surprised that the film doesn't even mention it. And there are a ton of underage students still milling about during the battle. I wonder if that's something that we're just supposed to assume happened, and the underage students at the battle were those that snuck back in (like the Creevy's). Either way, I thought it was interesting that it wasn't mentioned.

Plus, McGonagall and the other Heads of House gave their of-age students the choice to stay and fight or not. One of the major themes of the entire series is that it's our choices that make us who we are, not our preconditions. Giving those students the choice to fight or run was, I think, an important way to underscore this theme that we didn't get the chance to play out in the film. I will say , though, I loved the solidarity the Hogwarts student body showed when Snape was questioning them about Harry's presence in the castle. Not quite the same, but very poignant nonetheless.

Protecting Hogwarts

During both viewings, this definitely made me tear up. I loved all of the Order members and professors banding together to protect the castle against the Death Eaters. It has the perfect balance of true, touching emotion and humor – one of those scenes where you can't help crying and laughing at the same time.

Neville

Neville is amazing, end of story. I adored Matthew Lewis' performance, and I think they did an excellent job of truly capturing the spirit of Neville Longbottom. I have issues with some of the plot choices they made for Neville, but we'll come to that later.

Ron and Hermione

It's no secret that I don't care for Ron Weasley. However, I did like the way that Hermoine and Ron finally admitted their feelings to each other. While the film version was still cute (or, as cute as you can be when it involves Ron), I wish they had stayed truer to the book.

Fred's Death

Is it just me, or was being thisclose to Fred's death a big deal for Harry? Despite all of the horrible things Harry has witnessed, and all of the important and beloved people that have been taken from him by this war, Fred's death still hits him incredibly hard. I feel that not showing Fred's death cheats the audience in a way. We don't get the same experience – I don't think the shock-factor is the same just seeing Fred's body versus actually seeing his death. Additionally, I think that placing all of Harry's focus on Fred's body also takes something away from the deaths of Remus and Tonks. Then again, I think the filmmakers have shunted Remus and Tonks to the side for several films now, so it shouldn't be surprising that they do it again here.

The Prince's Tale

To put it simply, Alan Rickman broke my heart. His performance was utterly beautiful, completely deserving of as many acting accolades as he can get. Snape is not a character that we often see ruled by tender emotions. He routinely gives in to bouts of misplaced rage (Prisoner of Azkaban, for example), but we never get to see Snape show his softer side. Watching him lose control like that (especially with Lily's body in Godric's Hollow) is just so visceral and shocking. We've seen him angry, triumphant, and apathetic, but we've never seen Snape care so much.

I wish, of course, they had shown more, but what they did show was perfect. Except for the part where several people (who had seen the films only) were left with the impression that Snape was Harry's father. I have no idea where that might have come from, especially since the flashbacks feature Snape telling Dumbledore that Harry is “just like his father”, only mentioning James' negative characteristics.

The Forest Again

Harry's Reaction

I knew this scene wouldn't quite live up to Rowling's novel. There's something to be said for the emotional impact Rowling gives to Harry's realization that he must allow Voldemort to kill him. So many of her lines in the brief space between Harry emerging from the Pensieve and finding the Resurrection Stone tug at my heart and make me hurt just thinking about them. The film, honestly, was not as good as that, but I didn't expect it to be – at least for me. I identify more strongly with the written word than anything else, so I knew that Harry's reaction in the film wouldn't get to me in quite the same way. Dan Radcliffe did amazingly, as always, and my feeling of letdown during this scene is more a reflection of my personal preferences than the quality of the film.

The Resurrection Stone

I could not have asked the filmmakers to do this scene more perfectly. Out of everything that happens in the series, this one relatively short scene completely unhinges me. I can't read it without dissolving into tears. Hell, it's hard for me to talk about it without crying. Harry using James, Lily, Sirius, and Remus as his shield, as his strength is just so perfectly heartbreaking. He has been so, so brave, but when he has no more left in his tank – when all he wants to do is run away and hide – he turns to his departed love ones to find the courage left to continue. Every time I have read Deathly Hallows, this part has me sobbing. The first read-through, I had to put the book down and have myself a good cry – because I was actually crying too hard to see the page. The corresponding film scene did not disappoint. I had to try so hard not to sob uncontrollably in the theater both times. I loved it.

Teddy Freaking Lupin!

Why bother mentioning that Remus has a son? I mean, really, they've glossed over or ignored plenty of the finer points regarding Remus and Tonks for several films now. Besides, Teddy isn't even mentioned in the Epilogue, making Harry's mention of Teddy even more of a throwaway line.

Harry v. Voldie, Part 1

I was fairly happy with this penultimate confrontation between Harry and Voldemort. Since, of course, the point was that Harry willingly sacrificed himself, there weren't many ways they could have messed it up.

King's Cross

So, So Good

This is yet another one of those scenes where the differences that existed between the book and the film didn't matter. I know they omitted some things, and Dumbledore's explanations weren't exactly the same, but the scene had the same feel as the book, and that's what counts (in this case, anyway). Also, I loved the Voldie-baby-soul thing. It was gross, as it ought to be, and echoed perfectly the Volde-baby that Wormtail dropped into the cauldron in Goblet of Fire.

Michael Gambon!

I was, once again, thoroughly impressed with Michael Gambon's performance. Continuing his work in Half-Blood Prince, Gambon was the perfect Dumbledore. And, while I've greatly enjoyed this much improved version of Gambon, it makes me sad that we couldn't have had these great performances from him all along.

The Final Battle

What. The. Hell. Yates.

David Yates, I've trusted you. You've led me through an increasingly complicated and intricate plot and, for the most part, not made too many wrong moves. I've let you take me on the final steps of Harry's journey, and I've been pretty happy with what you produced. But, honestly, what the hell were you thinking, letting the end of the franchise play out like that? Why would you move so far away from JK Rowling's amazing plot and give us the equivalent of a Michael Bay action flick?

It wouldn't bother me so much if the rest of the movie wasn't so damn amazing. For me, the film really drops off as soon as Harry comes back from King's Cross. I didn't get the right emotions, the right feel of the thing. I was so focused on all of the differences – that seemed completely pointless to me – that I couldn't focus on experiencing the film the way I'm sure Yates intended. And (just like with Sirius' death in Order of the Phoenix), I feel that Yates took something away from me. I'll never get the chance to experience the end of the final Harry Potter film in a purely emotional way, because I'm too focused on what they got wrong. And I'm horribly disappointed because of it.

Neville v. Voldie

You know, despite all of the things that went very wrong with the end of this film, I kind of liked the confrontation between Neville and Voldemort. I loved that Neville stood up for himself – proved himself a true Gryffindor – and for all of wizard-kind, in a way, by telling Voldemort that they would not back down. Neville has gone on an incredible journey over the course of the series, and he finally comes into his own in Deathly Hallows.

But, David Yates, why couldn't Neville have just sliced Nagini's head off right there? Did we really need to add more action to this movie? Why did we need to add an extra Battle of Hogwarts? So frustrating!

Molly Weasley

I'm not a huge Molly Weasley fan, but I must say that her showdown with Bellatrix is a wonderful moment, in the series as a whole and for Molly as a character. This was a moment where the audience should have been cheering Molly on (as has happened at similarly defining moments at other midnight releases). Instead, it happened so fast, and without the required force, that I don't think half the people in our theater had time to react. Also, what was with Bellatrix melting – or whatever it was that she did? Isn't Avada kedavra good enough anymore?

Harry v. Voldie, Part 2

This is one of those moments when I just cannot fathom why the filmmakers would have deviated from Rowling's novel. At so many points throughout the film series, they take dialogue directly from the source material because, honestly, how can they say it better than JKR? She's the one who thought all of this freaking stuff up in the first place – mightn't her source material give us a clue as to how the rest ought to play out?

But no, for whatever reason, Yates and company decided to go with...well...a very action-oriented approach. This final confrontation – the ultimate good versus evil showdown – is not supposed to be physical. It's not about who's got more strength or magical ability; the point is that Harry has chosen the right path and Voldemort has chosen poorly. You don't need to add in any kind of physical battle between Harry and Voldemort – it's supposed to be a tense verbal confrontation, and we don't get any of that. Instead, we get a jaunty flight around the castle, culminating in a major anti-climax.

Harry is supposed to give Voldemort a choice – it's not too late for Voldemort to redeem himself, and Harry knows that. In a series that's all about choices, it's sad that Yates took that final choice away from the antagonist. But Harry also knows something else that Voldemort doesn't, something else that Voldemort can't hope to understand – love. Harry threw himself in death's path out of love. He knew it was his duty to die, in order for Voldemort to one day be defeated. That love, the same thing that protected Harry from Voldemort's curse the first time, is so important to the series, and I don't think Harry properly communicated that to Voldemort. Overall, poor way to end a really terrific series.

Epilogue

I'm not really sure how to feel about the Epilogue. I didn't dislike it, but I didn't really see the point of it either. In general, the Epilogue leaves me feeling “meh”, but not because I thought it was poorly done – I'm just not a big epilogue fan in general.

Well, dear reader, thank you for suffering through my longest blog entry to date. I hope I didn't scare you away yet...

Mischief Managed,

Slim Pearl Silver-Feather

Currently reading: The Valley of Horses, Jean M. Auel (because apparently the theme of my 2011 reading list is series)

Books read in 2011: 21

Up next: I'm not completely sure. I'd like to do a reaction piece on The Dark Tower, and then I'll go back and work on those character blogs.

Harry Potter Challenge: Day 3

Today's Prompt: Which (if any) of the films have made you angry because they've ignored important parts of the book?

I could point to so many things from each book that I wish they had included/done differently and many things that upset me. Just owing to the difficulty in crunching an entire novel into a movie, there are things that have to be left out and/or changed to further the plot in a timely fashion. I get that, but it doesn't mean I can't get ticked when things don't go to exactly according to the books.

Here are a few of the more glaring omissions/changes I take issue with:

• Harry and Sirius's Relationship
  • Offending Film(s): Mostly Goblet of Fire
  • My Issue: So, let me get this straight...Harry risks his life and liberty (fighting off Dementors and helping a fugitive escape) to save Sirius at the end of Prisoner of Azkaban, then has ONE CONVERSATION with the man during the whole next school year? Based on what we see in Goblet of Fire, why should Harry and Sirius share such a warm embrace when they meet in Order of the Phoenix? I know Goblet of Fire is long and must have been difficult to adapt, but for goodness sake, how could they have possibly ignored one of the most important relationships with an adult that Harry has?
• Dobby
  • Offending Film(s): Goblet of Fire and Order of the Phoenix
  • My Issue: I like Dobby, very much, and I don't like that they give all of Dobby's important tasks (getting Harry the gillyweed, finding the Room of Requirement, etc) to Neville. Why should Harry be so heartbroken at Dobby's death in Deathly Hallows if he's only seen Dobby once since second year?
• Most of Goblet of Fire
  • Offending Film(s): Goblet of Fire
  • My Issue: Most people love the Triwizard Tournament, I get that. It's entertaining, what with evading dragons, fighting off merpeople, and navigating a maze filled with dangers galore. I, however, rather prefer the sub-plots of Goblet of Fire (Barty Crouch Jr, Ludo Bagman, SPEW, and Rita Skeeter). Not that I dislike the Tournament – I just wish they would have included more of the mystery sub-plots.
• Voldemort's Back Story
  • Offending Film(s): Half-Blood Prince
  • My Issue: Oh, c'mon, you're telling me you wouldn't want to see more of how Tom Riddle became Lord Voldemort? What Harry learns in Half-Blood Prince is SO important to his understanding of Voldemort and defeating him, I'm just sad they left so many of those Pensieve memories out.
• The Veil
  • Offending Film(s): Order of the Phoenix
  • My Issue: I have spoken, at great length, about my issues with this scene. They got my favorite character's death wrong, and I'm still not over it.
• The Mauraders
  • Offending Film(s): Pretty much everything from Prisoner of Azkaban on
  • My Issue: I SO wish they had paid a bit more attention to the Marauder's backstory. Not that it's essential to the audience's understanding of the plot, but I love the Marauders.
• Lupin and Tonks
  • Offending Film(s): Order of the Phoenix, Half-Blood Prince, Deathly Hallows Part 1
  • My Issue: I feel like they glossed over so much of Tonks and Lupin's relationship, and I think it will cheapen their deaths in Deathly Hallows Part 2. Their deaths are heartbreaking – not just because Tonks is a funny, kind woman and Lupin is a force for good – but because little Teddy Lupin is left fatherless. From the films, we barely know that Remus and Tonks are married and we have yet to find out about Teddy. So, what, at the beginning of Deathly Hallows Part 2 they're going to toss in something about Teddy being born and we're supposed to feel sorry for the kid? Listen to “Lullaby” by The Remus Lupins. That's how we're supposed to feel. Also, I LOVED Lupin's indecision about his relationship with Tonks. I wish they'd kept that part.
• RAB
  • Offending Film(s): Order of the Phoenix and Half-Blood Prince
  • My Issue: Sirius had a brother named Regulus. His initials were RAB. Thus, Regulus MUST have been RAB. Because there couldn't POSSIBLY be ANY other wizards with those initials. Riiiiiight.

Harry Potter Challenge: Day 2

Today's Prompt: Your favorite of the 7 films so far. 

One of my favorite things about the films is that they improve considerably over time. One reason for this, I think, is that the principal actors improved with each film. For most of the actors, Sorcerer's Stone was their first major role, and it took time for them to grow into themselves as actors. By Order of the Phoenix, and especially in Half-Blood Prince, I think the principal actors transitioned from child actors into grown-ups, and that shows with the improvement in their acting.

That said, I think my favorite move is probably Half-Blood Prince. Granted, I wish they had spent more time on Riddle's past and I wish they had thought better than to put in that scene at the Burrow. However, the thing that really makes me love this film is Michael Gambon's performance. I spend three films wishing Richard Harris hadn't passed away, because I missed his portrayal of Dumbledore. Michael Gambon just got it wrong. Very, very wrong in some cases. However, in Half-Blood Prince, Michael Gambon transformed into Dumbledore. He was gentle, commanding attention and respect without raising his voice, and self-possessed right down to the all-important “Severus, please.” He did such an amazing job, that I can't help but be touched by his performance, and it makes Half-Blood Prince my favorite of the Potter films. 

Mischief Managed,

Slim Pearl Silver-Feather 

Harry Potter Challenge: Day 1

A few friends of mine are doing this on Facebook, but I figured this would be a good way to guilt me into blogging every day for the next month...At any rate, there's one prompt per day, each related to the wide and wonderful world of Harry Potter.

Today's Prompt: Your favorite of the 7 books.



This one is surprisingly tough for me, since I love so many things about each of the books. My favorite story, probably, is Prisoner of Azkaban, but I think Deathly Hallows is my overall favorite book (I know that's a cop-out, but I really can't pick!).



Prisoner of Azkaban is a wonderfully nuanced story that balances Harry's quest to understand his past (and how that past relates to his future) and the changing dynamics of friendship and loyalty for 13-year old wizards. Harry's worldview expands to include the goings-on in the wizarding world outside of Hogwarts (granted, not as much as in later books, but it's a start). Rather than just worrying about lessons and the mysteries inside the castle, Harry begins to realize that it's not all about Hogwarts. Harry also learns lessons about acceptance, facing his fears, and realizes that the adults around him may not have revealed everything about his past.



And then there's Sirius Black. I love him so much, I can't even begin to explain it in a single paragraph. Granted, you spend most of the book thinking he's a murderous, raving lunatic, but he's still an interesting character. He escapes from Azkaban when no one had done it before. He breaks into Hogwarts castle and evades the teachers and dementors twice. Oh, and he doesn't murder Harry outright when he has the chance (more than once, I might add). You can tell right away that there's something more to his character than meets the eye. Overall, I think Prisoner of Azkaban is a fantastic, intriguing, and engaging story with wonderfully unexpected twists and turns. I love it. A lot.



Deathly Hallows, on the other hand, is a masterpiece of fiction. It manages to tie together so many important plots, resolve the story beautifully, and give a wonderful sense of closure. This book made me cry like a baby, more than once. And I loved every moment of it. Every character's death, every heartbreaking thought Harry has, and every terrifying moment are beautifully written and meaningful. No scene is wasted, and Rowling brings her epic to a stunning conclusion. It's a wonderful book, and probably the best-written of the series.

Mischief Managed,
Slim Pearl Silver-Feather

Fandom Survey, Part I: Buffy the Vampire Slayer

Alright, here's that Buffy the Vampire Slayer survey I wrote about last time. This probably goes without saying, but the survey will contain spoilers from all 7 seasons of Buffy (not the Season 8 comic, though). Read and enjoy!

1. The first character I fell in love with: Giles

What can I say? He was a handsome older man with a British accent who loved books. It was love at first sight.

2. The character I never expected to love as much as I do now: Andrew

Even though he was introduced as an erstwhile “bad guy”, I started to LOVE Andrew when he was held hostage by Buffy and the Scoobies. Thanks to Andrew, I have to say “vam-pyre” every single time.

3. The character everyone else loves that I don’t: the Potentials

Ok, I'm not sure that everyone loves the Potentials, but I wasn't a huge fan of that whole deal.

4. The character I love that everyone else hates: Dawn

Not that I love Dawn or anything, but I certainly don't hate her. I completely understand her behavior – she finds out she's not “real”, her mother dies, and she feels abandoned by all of her parental figures. She reacts like a 15 year-old would, making her realistic. Annoying, but realistic, and I respect that.

5. The character I used to love but don’t any longer: Anya

When she was first introduced, Anya was wonderful. Her off-color commentary on human nature was amusing, insightful, and surprisingly refreshing. After things with Xander fell apart, though, I didn't like her as much. Not that I'm blaming the girl for going a little evil after getting left at the altar, but I missed the old Anya.

6. The character I would shag anytime: Giles

Don't be creeped out, okay? I mean, honestly, have I mentioned the book thing?

7. The character I’d want to be like: Faith

Not that I want to be evil/crazy/a murderous bitch or anything, but I admire Faith. She understands the rules, but chooses to ignore them. I wish I could be more like that sometimes (though committing murder might be going a bit too far).

8. The character I’d slap: Caleb

Aside from the part where I kinda dig him (Nathan Fillion makes a great bad guy), he's mean and hates women.

9. A pairing that I love: Spike/Giles

Not a romantic pairing, but some of my favorite moments of the entire series come from Spike's tenure living with Giles during season 4. Case in point:

Spike: Passions is on! Timmy's down a bloody well, and if you make me miss it, I'll...

Giles: Do what? Lick me to death?

10. A pairing that I despise: Buffy/Riley

It's no secret that I'm not Riley's biggest fan, and I think his effect on Buffy has a lot to do with my feelings. At first, it seemed like Riley might be good for her – a nice, normal, old-fashioned dude. Turns out he was an Initiative commando, doomed to feel impotent compared to Buffy's Slayer ability. Not the best relationship, for either of them, and it went on too long.

11. Favorite male character (add a quote or favorite line): Giles (is anyone surprised? Anyone?)

While Giles has hundreds of amazing moments, this has to be my absolute favorite: “Now wait a minute. You think I'm evil if I bring a group of girls on a camping trip and don't touch them?”

12. Favorite female character (add a quote or favorite line): Willow

I really like her a lot. No particular reason, but I think she's probably my favorite. And while Willow has lots of amazing memorable moments and quotes, my favorite is one about her, spoken by Xander in the season 6 finale: “First day of kindergarten, you cried because you broke the yellow crayon and you were too afraid to tell anyone. You've come pretty far. Ending the world – not a terrific option. But the thing is? Yeah, I love you. I loved crayon-breaky Willow and I love scary veiny Willow. So, if I'm going out, it's here. If you wanna kill the world? Well, then start with me. I've earned that.”

13. My five favorite characters: Giles, Spike, Willow, Buffy, and Xander

14. My five least favorite characters: Riley (if I could count him as all 5, I would), Travers, Darla, Anya (post break-up with Xander), and Warren

15. Which character I am most like: Willow

While I am neither a witch nor a lesbian, I see a lot of myself in Willow, mostly in the early seasons. Willow excelled academically, but was afraid to “be herself” and didn't really come into her own socially until she accepted who she was. I think I'm the same way in many respects. It wasn't until I “gave up the ghost” and admitted that I'm a HUGE nerd that I found a core group of friends, so I can relate.

16. My deep, dark fandom secret: I don't really have one. Honestly. All my deep, dark secrets lie in other fandoms.

This survey was harder than I thought it would be! I kind of like it, so I think I'm going to apply it to other fandoms as well and make a series out of it. If you have any suggestions for a show/book/etc you'd like to see featured, leave it in the comments section.

Mischief Managed,

Slim Pearl Silver-Feather

Currently Reading: Blood and Chocolate

Books Read in 2011: 5 (I was off by 1 last time, but it's 5 now)

Characters I love and Loathe, Part I

Like most people in today's media-centric society, I love fiction. TV shows, films, and books (among other forms of media), have the ability to draw us into made-up worlds with made-up people and make us care. Most people don't watch a TV show week after week for analytical reasons like good writing, believable acting, and excellent production. We watch shows and cry over movies because we care about them. We care about what happens (albeit that's usually because of good technical aspects like acting, writing, and producing) to these fake people and their fake lives, so we have to tune in or turn the page to answer that age-old question “What happens next?”

Now I lumped myself in with “most people” when I said I love fiction. I am not, however, most people. I am, in fact, a freak. Fiction does something to me that's difficult to describe. When I get invested in a TV show or novel, it's a visceral experience. It goes beyond just wanting to see where the story goes – it's about experiencing the fictional world as though it were real, in a way. For me, fiction sometimes transcends the immediate experience and actually effects my life in a not altogether healthy way.

I don't have this problem/addiction/oddity with everything I watch or read (thank goodness. I think I would explode if I felt that much emotion). I can regularly watch many shows and read lots of books without forming any deep attachments. Take Grey's Anatomy or House, for example. I do not believe I have ever missed an episode of either, and I really enjoy those shows. However, while I am an avid viewer of both shows, I don't feel any kind of deep connection with either of them. It's hard to explain – it's almost like I have different levels of feelings when it comes to TV shows and books. I don't love House or Carrie the same way I love Stargate or Harry Potter.

Now, we've already established that I'm a freak for fiction. But, unfortunately, it doesn't stop there. Because my real problem isn't the way I experience and connect with fiction – the level to which I feel these connections may be abnormal, but I don't think it's an altogether unusual experience. That's why we love reading stories and watching shows. My real problem is that I'm in love with characters. Now I know the characters aren't real – I'm not crazy – but the way I react to some TV shows and books, you'd think I didn't know the difference.

I don't know why it happens and I can't really explain it, but I can't help but have incredibly strong reactions to certain characters (either positive or negative). Now I'm not talking about the feelings most people have towards characters. I think it's perfectly normal (healthy, even) to have a favorite character in a show or book. And there are plenty of shows and books that I can say that I'm “normal” about. What interests me, though, are the characters that elicit such strong reactions from me. Because, honestly, there are 3 characters (4, if I'm being truly honest with myself) that I am head over heels in love with and 3 characters that I absolutely detest.

Therefore, dear readers, I decided to start a series of blogs exploring why I have such strong reactions to these 6 (well, 7, really) characters. We'll examine each character in detail and try to figure out why I love or loathe them. For now, I'll just tell you their names to whet your appetite.

Characters I love – Sirius Black (Harry Potter), Daniel Jackson (Stargate: SG-1), Gale Hawthorne (The Hunger Games), and a special Mystery Guest (I may not be ready to reveal this love to the world just yet)

Characters I loathe – Ron Weasley (Harry Potter), Vala Mal Doran (Stargate: SG-1), and Peeta Mellark (The Hunger Games)

And, finally, because I've been assuring you that I'm at least somewhat normal, I'll leave you with a list of my favorite characters that I'm not unhealthily attached to (including some of the shows/series mentioned above). If I have a least favorite, I'll list that as well.

Books (FYI: I'm limiting this to book series. Otherwise, I'll be doing this forever)

Harry Potter – Hermione Granger (and if I had to pick another least favorite, Bellatrix Lestrange)

Discworld series – Sam Vimes

Bartimaeus trilogy – Bartimaeus

Lord of the Rings – Faramir (least favorite: Boromir – I love the coincidence there)

TV Shows

Buffy the Vampire Slayer – Rupert Giles, with Spike as a close second (least favorite: Riley)

The X-Files – Alex Krycek

Stargate: Atlantis – Ronan Dex, with Carson Beckett as a close second

Avatar: The Last Airbender – Prince Zuko (least favorite: Toph)

Firefly – Mal or Wash

Stargate: SG-1 – Ba'al (and if I had to pick another least favorite, Kinsey)

Coupling – Jeff

Sanctuary – Will Zimmerman (I'm worried this is bordering on unhealthy) or Big Guy

Stargate: Universe – Dr. Nicholas Rush

Well, I believe that's it for now. There's a Buffy survey another blogger I follow posted a while back, and I think I might steal that and post my answers later this week. I'll try to have another part in this series posted by the end of the weekend, along with a whirl-wind summary of what I've been reading.

Mischief Managed,

Slim Pearl Silver-Feather

Currently Reading: Wizard and Glass (The Dark Tower, Part IV)

Books Read in 2011: 5, I think (I'll have to check on that)

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 (Finally)

After seeing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 for the second time last month, I finally feel like I'm ready to talk about it. Fair warning, this post will contain spoilers for both the book and movie. I'm also going to be discussing stuff from the second half of the book and the second film. If you haven't read it/seen it and care to – stop reading now. Review/brain dump continues below the line.

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

I'm never sure exactly what to expect when I see a new Harry Potter film for the first time. Well, obviously I know what I'm getting into plot-wise, as I've read all of the books countless times. However, each time a new film comes out, I can't help but wonder how the filmmakers will translate JK Rowling's words into actions. What things will they leave out? What things will they add? Will they use Rowling's dialogue, or will they create their own? And, as we've progressed in the series, I keep wondering how on earth they will address some of the very important things they've hitherto left out.

And, every time a new Harry Potter film has come out, I have been left feeling at least mildly disappointed. Don't get me wrong – I think the filmmakers have done an absolutely wonderful job of translating the books to the screen. While there are lots of decisions, in terms of writing, directing, and acting that I disagree with (see: Michael Gambon's performances in Prisoner of Azkaban through Order of the Phoenix, the business at the Burrow in Half-Blood Prince, and the entirety of Goblet of Fire), I think that, on the whole, the films are great companions to the books. However, there has always been something major that I feel should have been addressed that wasn't.

Obviously, the films cannot hope to capture the subtle nuances of a 500+ page novel in a 2-hour production. Some things have to be cut or altered, and the films cannot be a perfect translation of the novel. However, with the first six Potter films, there were differences – usually glaring ones – that distracted me from experiencing the films in a truly emotional way.

Perhaps the most surprising thing about Deathly Hallows Part 1 is that there were differences – and I didn't care. Sitting in the theater watching the film for the first time, it didn't matter to me that they didn't get it exactly right – I had (almost) as intense of an emotional experience watching the movie as I did reading the book. It wasn't a perfect translation, but it was as perfect as I could have hoped for. What the filmmakers lacked in following the novel to the letter, they made up for in feeling and intensity. What they got right was so perfect that I was able to easily overlook what they didn't get quite right.

There are, as I'm sure you might suspect, a number of things I'd like to address. Read on, if you dare...

Harry and Hermione's Relationship

Say what you will, but I think that the filmmakers handled Harry and Hermione's relationship exceptionally well. Harry and Hermione have, throughout the series, a very strong bond of friendship. You can't go through the things they go through and not be close. And their relationship is, for the most part, platonic. It's fairly obvious from early on that Hermione likes Ron while Harry has obvious feelings for Cho and, later, Ginny. Harry simply does not see Hermione in a romantic way (and, at least outwardly, Hermione feels the same way. Since we're not focalized through her, we can't know that, of course, but we can infer). Additionally, Ron shares in most of the harrowing experiences that draw Harry and Hermione together, thus bonding all three together in deep friendship. Sure, Harry has some adventures with Hermione alone, but no more than he has with Ron.

However, during Deathly Hallows, Harry and Hermione share something that Ron isn't a part of (because he walked away, remember) and grow closer as a result of those experiences. The isolation of Harry and Hermione makes these experiences different from those they've had before (like at the end of Prisoner of Azkaban or when Harry and Ron weren't talking during Goblet of Fire). Harry and Hermione are alone together for almost all of the time Ron is absent, meaning that their experiences are much more intimate.

This intimacy is expressed in several ways in the book, most notably when Hermione musses Harry's hair at James and Lily's graves in Godric's Hollow. It's an intimate gesture meant to hint at the new, adult, character of their relationship. There are moments throughout parts of Deathly Hallows where Harry and Hermione could have ended up together. But, they didn't – their friendship is deepened by the time they spend alone together, but it never becomes anything more.

I think that the film does an excellent job of showing us some of these intimate moments, the what could have beens. While they include the scene in Godric's Hollow that I mentioned above, I like that they included other moments not found in the novel. I know – I just said that I liked something that they added in just for the movie. However, the new-found sense of intimacy between Harry and Hermione is a feeling the reader gets from Harry's thoughts, not necessarily actions. Adding in scenes like the dance or Hermione saying that they could grow old together help reinforce the intimacy in a way that otherwise would be difficult (if not impossible).

Remus Lupin

I really wished they had included the business with Remus leaving Tonks / being an idiot. In the end, it doesn't really matter, but I thought that was an interesting scene. I especially thought that it showed how Harry had grown up while Lupin, in some ways, remained emotionally stunted. Or maybe it's just because I have a love of all things Marauders...

The Dursleys

While I do appreciate that the Dursleys were included (after being cut out of Half-Blood Prince), I do wish they had spent more time on their departure. In fact, I just wish Harry could have gotten to say goodbye on camera (rather than just watching them drive off). I especially wish we had seen Dudley redeem himself, if only slightly, by declaring that Harry wasn't a “waste of space.”

When Did They Learn That?

I found myself thinking that quite a bit on the second watch-through. There were three things that I wondered a bit about. (1) Apparation. When, exactly, did they learn to apparate? They seem pretty good at it for apparently having learned on the spot. (2) Wordless magic. I guess we didn't spend too much time in class with Harry during the last film, so maybe we missed a thing or two, but it feels like we went from saying every spell to doing a LOT of wordless magic with no in-between stage. (3). The two-way mirror. I could be wrong, but I don't think Harry learned it was a two-way mirror in the movie. Yet, he must know, because he's not creeped out when he sees Aberforth.

A lot of times, with these films, my brain will automatically fill in the gaps. I just assume that the characters in the film know everything they would in the book, even if we haven't been told it in the movie. That way, things like this don't bother me too much.

RAB

I could say a lot, but I'll keep it brief. I wish that Kreacher could have told the entire story about going with Regulus to retrieve the real horcrux, but I understand that it's not the most important thing in the book and was expendable. What did bother me, though, was how freaking quickly they jumped from seeing “Regulus Arcutus Black” on the door to “RAB was Sirius's brother.” Did that seem like a suspicious leap in logic to anybody else? At least in the book, they remembered the big locket they threw out in Order of the Phoenix. And Kreacher backed up their theory.

Acting – Specifically, Rupert Grint

I am constantly impressed with how talented Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint have become. They have done an amazing job growing as actors and growing into their characters. That said, in Deathly Hallows, Rupert Grint blew me away. He is starting to make me like Ron Weasley. Just a little bit, though.

Malfoy Manor

Forgive me if I am incorrect, but Peter Pettigrew was supposed to die, right? Weird.

Dobby's Death Scene

In my opinion, Dobby is one of the most endearing characters in Rowling’s series. Loyal not to his hereditary preconditions, but to his ideals, he fights for what he believes is right, at any cost. Despite particularly unconventional methods (stealing Harry’s mail, bewitching the bludger, etc), Dobby did what he had to in order to help Harry. More than once, Dobby risked everything to help Harry because he believed in what Harry stood for (the power of love, goodness, etc).

And there’s no denying it – Dobby is good. Rowling could have written his character as flat and one-dimensional. However, she treated us to a non-human that is more humane than many wizards we meet. Dobby grows into his role as a free elf, as a voice for how non-human intelligent creatures should be treated. Unwavering in his commitment to help Harry Potter, Dobby defies the Malfoy family yet again (which must have been difficult. Despite his freedom, his preconditioned impulse to serve his old masters can’t be easy to overcome). And, in the end, his love and loyalty costs him his life.

Now, many (many) of Rowling’s beautifully written characters died because of their love for or loyalty to Harry (his parents, Sirius, Remus, Tonks, Moody, etc). I don’t want to take anything away from those deaths. Whether they particularly affected Harry or us as readers doesn’t matter – Rowling is not one to kill off characters for no reason. All deaths are significant in their own right. However, I feel that Dobby’s death is particularly painful, both for us and for Harry. Reading Deathly Hallows for the first time, the moment when Dobby dies in Harry’s arms had me crying so hard I couldn’t see the words to keep reading (not the first time that would happen during Deathly Hallows, I promise you). It hurt so bad to read about the death of someone that was so pure, so good, so undeserving of such a cruel fate.

To say that the corresponding scene in the movie didn’t disappoint would be a huge understatement. I cried nearly as hard as when I read the book - even knowing what was coming didn’t prepare me for my reaction. It was so visceral, so much more emotional than anything I’ve experienced during a Harry Potter film – I couldn’t believe it. It was handled absolutely perfectly. The differences (changes in dialogue, characters present in the scene, etc) didn’t matter. Not at all. As with so much of the rest of the film, David Yates captured the perfect feel/emotion/tone of the scene. He made me feel like JK Rowling made me feel, and that’s quite the accomplishment.

The death of a character is, I think, particularly tricky for filmmakers adapting a work of fiction. On one hand, deaths are usually described with some degree of detail (though not always), making it somewhat easier for filmmakers to get it “right” (if we assume it is “right” to follow the author’s cannon). On the other hand, having that description already written can make filmmakers feel boxed in and unable to put their own creativity and spin on the scene. In this film, Yates walks the perfect balance – he sticks with cannon where it matters which, in this case, is the emotional response of the scene. The dialogue may be different, but Dobby and Harry don’t act out of character and the way you feel watching the scene mimics the feel the book gives.

This is probably my favorite scene in the entire film. It made me cry like a baby both times I've seen the movie, but I absolutely love it. I also love that David Yates made you care about Dobby. After having been cut out of Goblet of Fire, Order of the Phoenix and Half-Blood Prince (and his function in the first to being passed to Neville?), it would have been easy to overlook the importance of Dobby's death. Or, at the very least, Harry's emotional reaction would have felt melodramatic (after all, in “film-world”, Harry hadn't seen Dobby since 2^nd Year). Yates, however, managed to give Dobby the importance he deserved, both in life and in death.

[Time for an unfortunately lengthy digression. Promise, it's still Harry Potter related. Just not specifically Deathly Hallows related. Sorry!] Now for all I’m praising David Yates for handling Dobby’s death with such mastery, he doesn’t always get it right. For evidence, watch the death of Sirius in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. I might be biased because of my unwavering love for Sirius Black, but I feel like Yates took something away from me in that scene. To be completely frank, Yates and company messed up big time. I will concede that the novel doesn't specifically say which spell Bellatrix used, but it is strongly inferred that Sirius was sent through the Veil with a Stunning Spell, not Avada Kedavra.

What's my evidence, you may ask? For one, Harry's reaction. If Bellatrix had hit Sirius with a Killing Curse, would Harry have expected Sirius to come back from behind the Veil? Would Lupin have needed to spell things out for Harry, telling him that Sirius couldn't come back? Harry has seen Avada Kedavra used before, and knows that it kills instantly (unless your initials are HJP, of course). If Bellatrix had used the Killing Curse, Harry wouldn't have reacted the way he did.

Besides, the book says “the second jet of light hit him squarely in the chest” (I would reference the page number, but the book is upstairs and I'm being lazy) just after Sirius dodges a red jet of light, which indicates a Stunning Spell. This tells me that the second jet of light was also red. If it were a different color (say, green, indicating Avada Kedavra), Rowling might have mentioned the color change. At any rate, the only reason we know that Sirius is dead is because Lupin and Dumbledore tell Harry as much. The Veil isn't explained (at all, which annoys me), but it's assumed to have killed Sirius, not Bellatrix's curse. The ambiguous circumstances surrounding his death leave hope (especially for pathetic, obsessed fangirls like me) that Sirius might one day return through the Veil.

Now, why does the film version of this scene upset me? BECAUSE BELLATRIX USES AVADA KEDAVRA!!!!! Sorry, but that's not right. The use of the Killing Curse takes away any doubt that Sirius Black is dead. This changes the nature of the scene in two ways: deviation from cannon and change in tone. We'll deal with cannon first, because it's the most obvious. What happens in the movie isn't the same as what happens in the book. Furthermore, since the Order of the Phoenix film came out before Deathly Hallows was released, it changed how I viewed the final book. I couldn't expect Sirius to return in the book because he was definitively dead. If he wasn't dead, Rowling would have told the filmmakers to change his “death” scene (this is NOT just wishful thinking – she insisted they include Kreacher in the film, telling filmmakers he would become important later. Obviously, if Rowling feels strongly enough about “what's important later” to let the filmmakers know).

The alteration of this scene also changes the emotional impact, both for Harry and for the audience. Harry's reaction in the film, while heartbreaking, is fundamentally different from his reaction in the movie. Movie-Harry is, understandably, distraught over the loss of his godfather. However, book-Harry's reaction is, I think, more profound. At first, he doesn't believe that Sirius is dead, and his reaction to Lupin's words is awful (think of it this way: Your best friend gets shoved through an open doorway. You expect them to be alright – probably really angry at whoever shoved them, and maybe a little banged up, but fundamentally alright. Instead, you find out that while getting shoved through the doorway, they had a heart attack and died. You thought your friend would have a scraped knee. Instead, you no longer have a best friend.). Furthermore, Harry doesn't fully believe that Sirius is dead, even after Dumbledore and Lupin confirm it. Harry's reaction to the two-way mirror and questioning Nearly Headless Nick are proof of that. Book-Harry doubts because of the ambiguous nature of Sirius's death. Movie-Harry does not doubt. It's still sad, but not in the same way.

Perhaps this upsets me so much because of my reaction upon seeing Order of the Phoenix for the first time. The first time I read the book, I got so upset that I threw it against the wall and bawled my eyes out for at least 10 minutes. After I re-read it a few times to make sure (I was just as confused as Harry). Seeing the movie for the first time, I was so mad that Bellatrix used Avada Kedavra that I couldn't be sad. I was so focused on the differences that I couldn't have an emotional reaction to my favorite character's death. Thanks for that, David Yates. [Here ends the digression. Sorry again.]

In Conclusion

Deathly Hallows Part 1 was, by far, the best Potter film yet. I am beyond excited for the second part to come out in 2011. If the filmmakers treat Rowling's work with such care, respect, and honor as they did in the first film, the second should be even better than the first (judging by my personal feelings towards the second part of the book).

And if I thought my bawl-baby reaction to Dobby's death was bad, I'm a little afraid to see how I react to Harry using the Resurrection Stone. I have never, in my life, cried so hard over something fictional as I did during that scene in the book. I mean, really, go re-read it right now. If it doesn't tug at your heartstrings, you have no soul.

Alright, for now, I shall sign off. If you soldiered on through the whole thing, bravo to you, my friend. Thank you for indulging my long-winded analysis.

There are three other blogs I have planned, for now, at least. Up next: Characters I Love (and Loathe).

Mischief Managed,

Slim Pearl Silver-Feather