Harry Potter TV Series (2 Viewers)

[St. Widge]

See, e.g., John Carpenter re. Wang Chi as the Hero in Big Trouble in Little China, discussed supra at p. 5, #68.

But that's not what's happening here. We aren't talking about making Harry the bad guy and Voldermort the good guy. We are talking about how to resolve the sub-plot love triangle.

 

[livefromDC]

Yeah, I disagree a bit on sticking the landing perfectly on the ending. It worked, but there were issues with it.

It was a satisfying ending but definitely not perfect. Michael Gambon is a fine actor but he was terrible as Dumbledore. Admittedly got better in 6, but was still didn't get it right. Would love to see him portrayed better with a more on character depiction of his flaws and compassion.

My #1 gripe by far is the way in which Voldemort died. With all the mythology and fear surrounding him, he ABSOLUTELY had to die in full view of everyone at the Battle of Hogwarts. His body wasn't supposed to disappear. His lifeless body was supposed to fall to the ground like anyone else who had just been killed. The way he died continues to annoy me to no end! His death left no reason for anyone to think he was finally gone for good. The book got this right by a mile and movie made it some mystical crap that only Harry was there to witness. Smh, totally got it wrong.

 

[St. Widge]

It was a satisfying ending but definitely not perfect. Michael Gambon is a fine actor but he was terrible as Dumbledore. Admittedly got better in 6, but was still didn't get it right. Would love to see him portrayed better with a more on character depiction of his flaws and compassion.

My #1 gripe by far is the way in Voldemort died. With all the mythology and fear surrounding him, he ABSOLUTELY had to die in full view of everyone at the Battle of Hogwarts. His body wasn't supposed to disappear. His lifeless body was supposed to fall to the ground like anyone else who had just been killed. The way he died continues to annoy me to no end! His death left no reason for anyone to think he was finally gone for good. The book got this right by a mile and movie made it some mystical crap that only Harry was there to witness. Smh, totally got it wrong.

That's a fair criticism of the end. I guess I just didn't feel the ambiguity when I saw it but frankly, even with a body I'm not sure in a world of magic anyone should ever think someone is gone for good? Especially Voldermort?

Anyway, it's a fair criticism, and Gambon never seemed quite right for Dumbledore. I know they were forced to replace Richard Harris (who was great in the role), but Gambon just didn't seem right to me. I know it's bit on the nose, but I really would have liked to see if Ian McKellen could have pulled it off. But, there was a risk he just would have been Gandalf in a Harry Potter movie. Maybe Patrick Stewart with a wig?

 

[UptownSaintsFan]

Um…with all due respect …HUH?!?
Clearly they wanted the River run battle to be the penultimate 9th episode
And every book reader ive heard has said there’s more than enough material for multiple more seasons

just finished the book and i agree with you. 4 seasons sounds perfect.

 

[Taurus]

It's like John Carpenter saying Wang Chi is the hero of Big Trouble in Little China. I respect your opinion as the creator, but it's objectively false.

Or like Ridley Scott saying Deckard is a replicant.

 

[tenordas]

Or like Ridley Scott saying Deckard is a replicant.

Although the difference there is he didn't write the story like Carpenter and Rowling did, respectively.

Philip K. Dick said Ridley Scott was wrong, Deckard definitely is not a replicant, and that in fact, part of the point of the story is how he's been dehumanized by his occupation of hunting and killing replicants.

 

[St. Widge]

Although the difference there is he didn't write the story like Carpenter and Rowling did, respectively.

Philip K. Dick said Ridley Scott was wrong, Deckard definitely is not a replicant, and that in fact, part of the point of the story is how he's been dehumanized by his occupation of hunting and killing replicants.

You know, I read the book and it seemed clear to me that Deckard was a replicant. Did Dick really say that he wasn't?

 

[tenordas]

You know, I read the book and it seemed clear to me that Deckard was a replicant. Did Dick really say that he wasn't?

100%.

Philip K. Dick

web.archive.org

"The purpose of this story as I saw it was that in his job of hunting and killing these replicants, Deckard becomes progressively dehumanized. At the same time, the replicants are being perceived as becoming more human. Finally, Deckard must question what he is doing, and really what is the essential difference between him and them? And, to take it one step further, who is he if there is no real difference?

But there are clear indications in the story as well. The androids in the story can't feel empathy and they think that Mercersim (which was left out of the film entirely) is a scam. Deckard clearly feels empathy towards others, even the androids themselves eventually. He also experiences Mercerism and in the opening, he uses an empathy box, which we're later told the androids aren't able to use. Clearly, Deckard cannot be an android.

The ambiguity is on purpose because Dick is trying to point out that we as humans must retain our empathy or we have no more "right to exist" than the androids who have no feelings of concern for life forms other than their personal self. This is where Deckard is in wrestling with the fact he kills living beings as a vocation. Dick is using the androids as a metaphor for humanity's (at "the ruling class") maltreatment of animals and nature as a whole, and Deckard basically is humanity growing a conscience.

 

[St. Widge]

100%.

Philip K. Dick

web.archive.org

But there are clear indications in the story as well. The androids in the story can't feel empathy and they think that Mercersim (which was left out of the film entirely) is a scam. Deckard clearly feels empathy towards others, even the androids themselves eventually. He also experiences Mercerism and in the opening, he uses an empathy box, which we're later told the androids aren't able to use. Clearly, Deckard cannot be an android.

The ambiguity is on purpose because Dick is trying to point out that we as humans must retain our empathy or we have no more "right to exist" than the androids who have no feelings of concern for life forms other than their personal self. This is where Deckard is in wrestling with the fact he kills living beings as a vocation. Dick is using the androids as a metaphor for humanity's (at "the ruling class") maltreatment of animals and nature as a whole, and Deckard basically is humanity growing a conscience.

I suppose I read those things as signs that Deckard was a replicant that had gained consciousness. But if Dick says he wasn't then he Wasn't.

 

[Taurus]

Although the difference there is he didn't write the story like Carpenter and Rowling did, respectively.

Philip K. Dick said Ridley Scott was wrong, Deckard definitely is not a replicant, and that in fact, part of the point of the story is how he's been dehumanized by his occupation of hunting and killing replicants.

To me it's always been clear that Deckard's a human. Deckard has human memories, which would make him a Nexus 7, like Rachel. No one at any point indicates that Deckard is a hugely expensive prototype replicant sent out with a license to kill. Who the hell would sign off on that?
Deckard also gets his butt handed to him by Pris, a pleasure model and he's helpless against Leon and Roy. Again, who'd send out a hugely expensive prototype to hunt beings that can tear it apart like a rotisserie chicken?
Why would Gaff bother saying "It's too bad she won't live!" if he knows Deckard is a replicant? He'd surely know.

Not to mention how the point of the story falls apart if everyone's a replicant. You get no "What does it mean to be human?" question, you get no contrast between a man whom the years have not treated kindly and the replicants who would take those unkind years in a heartbeat just to live a little longer.

 

[SaintsFanInLA]

Not for nothin' but the Wizarding World of Harry Potter at Universal Studios is the best ride/amusement park environment I have ever been on or seen. That section of the park could literally be expanded to an entire Theme Park full of NOTHING but Harry Potter related content. It really is that good. DiaGON Alley, Butterbeer, Honeydukes, Hogwarts, et al... It really is a place to fan out, geek out, just plain ol' enjoy yourself.

 

[Optimus Prime]

I have high hopes for this show, I think the books are much better than the movies (which I liked a lot)

so much more in the books to cover

Hope they are able to work in small parts for Jim Dale and Stephen Fry (narrators of the American and British audiobooks - I prefer Fry)

 

[Optimus Prime]

Imagine a Last of Us episode 3 type episode where we're introduced to new characters in a flashback featuring the Longbottom family.

Imagine seeing Alice Longbottom's story play out leading to her and Frank becoming pregnant with Neville Longbottom and finally giving birth on July 30th, totally in step with the prophecy. But instead becoming the boy that lived. Neville showed the magical propensity you would assume the prophesied one would have since he was able to magically adjust his own blankets to tightly swaddle himself just moments after being born. Everyone missed the incredible show of power. The midwife just assumed that Frank, the proud and cautious dad, had tucked his son in. This would be a theme for Neville's childhood that continued through school. Often overlooked and under estimated by those who loved him, not because of malice or ill intent, just because they weren't paying attention. And so it happened that the child who fit the prophecy perfectly, was over looked for the half-blood born on July 31st.

I mean...c'mon.

I really like this idea

Not as part of the seasons but stand alone episodes that can air between seasons

Multiple 1 - 3 episode spin offs, I like the Longbottom idea, we see Harry with the Dursleys before he goes off to Hogwarts each year, maybe show what some of the others are up to when at home, Hermoine with her muggle parents, even Draco. maybe even some of the teachers

 

[St. Widge]

To me it's always been clear that Deckard's a human. Deckard has human memories, which would make him a Nexus 7, like Rachel. No one at any point indicates that Deckard is a hugely expensive prototype replicant sent out with a license to kill. Who the hell would sign off on that?
Deckard also gets his butt handed to him by Pris, a pleasure model and he's helpless against Leon and Roy. Again, who'd send out a hugely expensive prototype to hunt beings that can tear it apart like a rotisserie chicken?
Why would Gaff bother saying "It's too bad she won't live!" if he knows Deckard is a replicant? He'd surely know.

Not to mention how the point of the story falls apart if everyone's a replicant. You get no "What does it mean to be human?" question, you get no contrast between a man whom the years have not treated kindly and the replicants who would take those unkind years in a heartbeat just to live a little longer.

It's been a long time since I read the book and I only read it once so I don't recall all the details you do, but I guess I always thought that Deckhard being so human (along with Baty) supported the idea that the replicants had become more human than the humans who created them and that humans had lost their humanity.

But, that could just because I've seen the movie so many times and listed to the White Zombie song More Human than Human too many times.

 

[Optimus Prime]

It's been a long time since I read the book and I only read it once so I don't recall all the details you do, but I guess I always thought that Deckhard being so human (along with Baty) supported the idea that the replicants had become more human than the humans who created them and that humans had lost their humanity.

But, that could just because I've seen the movie so many times and listed to the White Zombie song More Human than Human too many times.

There are several different cuts of the movie and I think some make it clearer than others