Again, I love watching movies, not reading books, from "The Sorcerer's Stone" to "Half-Blood Prince", or pirated discs, or the big screen. Of the six "Harry Potter" that have been released so far, I haven't had a single one. pull. But I didn’t read the book carefully, I just browsed it, but I like to listen to stories. When I was chatting with Rowling’s book fans, I often asked them to tell me the stories in the book. Chu. Of course I'm not a hardcore fan, so I just watch the excitement, but after watching "Half-Blood Prince" this time, I suddenly felt a little emotion, hitting a child on a rainy day, let's just pile it up.
1. Suspense setting
I don't believe that a movie with a poorly set suspense can become a commercial blockbuster, but any director who wants to pay from the pockets of ordinary people must do enough in the suspense of the film's story. In fact, the success of Rowling’s original book is to a large extent the success of suspense: On a larger scale, "You know who he is" and Harry with a scar on his forehead constitute a total suspense, which runs through seven novels and eight movies. The audience I just want to know how this happened; and the suspense of each episode is also very prominent. Basically, the XXX of "Harry Potter and XXX" is the core suspense of the episode. Relatively speaking, the first few episodes are a bit of a routine. Anyway, it is the teacher who teaches Defense Against the Dark Arts—but no one is sure if it was Rowling’s trip, so you don’t see the last moment. I really don't know what monster moths will come out again.
In terms of movies, I think "Prisoner of Azkaban" is the best in suspense setting. The movie in this episode actually shakes two big burdens: "Sirius" Black’s good and evil stance and Hermione’s time-space rotator, in addition to Professor Lupin’s werewolf identity (by the way, it satirizes a happy boy Professor Rohart), the rat transformation of Wormtail, and Harry Potter's small burden of seeing the patron saint (he thought he had seen his father). Of course, "burden" and "suspense" are also two concepts in my opinion. Anything readers/audiences want to know but have not yet known can be attributed to suspense; while "burden" (not in a comic sense) is The "unexpected, reasonable" suspense solution method, once everyone sees it, it suddenly becomes clear to you: It turns out that the bad guy is/not him/her! This "baggage" even shakes beautifully. According to this standard, "Prisoner of Azkaban" should be the best among the current six "Harry Potter" movies in terms of sub-suspense settings. In comparison, "The Sorcerer's Stone" can be regarded as a full series of quizzes and explanations of the world view, while "The Lost Chamber" makes Tom Riddle's past confusing (it was only revealed in the "Half-Blood Prince" movie The secret of that Horcrux), "Prisoner of Azkaban", obviously reached a high point-so the previous three "Harry Potter" show a clear upward trend in plot settings. I watched these three movies first and then understood the content of the novel, so I basically regarded them as reasoning movies to enjoy. Harry Potter is like Conan in Rowling's writings. Following his whereabouts, the mysteries are gradually laid out. So looking at each part, there will be higher expectations.
"Goblet of Fire" is a turning point. In this episode of the movie, "You Know Who He Is", the looming figure appears for the first time. The decision, his innate British aristocratic solitary temperament fits the role closely), and then the total suspense gradually became overwhelming. However, in the "Goblet of Fire" movie, the Triwizard Tournament has been maximized, and the "baggage" of Little Crouch is hidden during the competition, so it can still be appreciated as a reasoning film, although it is not compared to " "Prisoner of Azkaban" has taken it to the next level, but at least it has maintained its original level. It is not ugly on the big screen (it’s just that those dragons in the magical world disappointed me a bit. Since I did a stunt, I should do it. It has to be more brilliant).
Starting from the "Order of the Phoenix", the "Harry Potter" series of films gradually became a little boring. Compared with the previous four, the whole film is more of a stunt show. Although so far this is the most "you know who he is" score, but the warm-up game is not as good as the finals, and good paragraphs are required. Save it till the end, don't you? So the audience only saw the unsuccessful plastic surgery "Do you know who he is" and Dumbledore, who had a magical magic wand, blasted the laser light, basically it didn't interfere with Harry Potter. Anyway, our little Zhengtai It is "The Chosen One" known to both humans and demons. If you can't die, you can't die.
I personally feel that "Order of the Phoenix" has fallen into the bottom of "Harry Potter", so I very much doubt the real reason why "Half-Blood Prince", which was originally released last fall, was dragged to this summer-it is estimated that the WGA trouble is just Under a guise, Warner’s senior executives forced Yates and Steve Croves to modify the script to be inside information. But compared to "Order of the Phoenix", "Half-Blood Prince" is a bit stronger, but the soup is not changed, and the buttons are all for the follow-up film service: Dumbledore drank some dirty water, and Snape used it. An Avadaso curse took the principal's life, and the plot did not lead to the village or the shop. If you don’t understand the infernal arrangements behind, and treat "Half-Blood Prince" as a purely independent film-to be honest, I don't think it's worth the money to go to the cinema.
But I still have to go to the cinema to watch-the next two episodes of "Dead Hallows" will definitely be there. This is the unique charm of "Harry Potter". They all talk about suspense. In fact, there is no suspense in the "Harry Potter" series, especially after the books are released. Even if you are too lazy to read a book and go to Google, it will be solved; if the wiki is blocked, Baidu knows that it is enough. However, this does not prevent the audience from rushing in the movie theaters for Harry Potter's name-in the past it was "guess the process, but can't guess the ending", now it is "everyone can guess the ending" , Just can't guess the process"-but strictly speaking, even the process can be guessed. Therefore, in this era, suspense’s survival method itself has become suspense. For die-hard fans, I think it’s the real suspense to see how Hollywood presents Rowling’s brilliant pens, but the suspense of the story itself is quiet. Retired (so, "Harry Potter" film reviews can be written with confidence, without considering the issue of spoilers).
However, I still have to say a few words of justice for David Yates, not because Director Ye does not or does not want to set up suspense, but from this episode, "You Know Who He Is" has officially appeared on stage, and all the preparations must be for the last. The total suspense and the heavy burden of service in the war were always calm before the war. A little lighter seems to be the meaning of the question. Of course, as far as the audience is concerned, I think Yates’ supply is still not satisfactory to most people. From novels to films, a lot of details have to be deleted, which really tests the skill of the screenwriter. In fact, the secret organization of "The Order of the Phoenix" is not uncommon in Western novels. Dan Brown has even set up the "Prince of Sion" and the "Illuminati". Even if Yates can't ask Brown for advice, then Watch a few more videos about "Skull and Bones" for learning, and it is estimated that the effect will be better.
In fact, since Yates took over, the narrative characteristics of "Harry Potter" have changed: on the one hand, it is an out-and-out blockbuster; on the other hand, it is also a standard magic soap opera.
2. Movie drama series
I think that the series of narratives in mainstream movies can be roughly divided into two categories: one is the character narration of relatively overhead time and space. Using Bakhtin's theory to understand, the time and space in the film is an "enclave". Outside the white horse, the vicissitudes of life, but our protagonist is not old and unrestrained. The typical representative is the "007" series. It has been almost half a century in the blink of an eye. You see James Bond is still youthful and bright, because there is no inheritance relationship between each episode of "007", and 007 says it is a person. Rather than say it is a logo, any man who fits its characteristics can become the protagonist—and then continue to move with the rhythm of social fashion. The other type is "Harry Potter", where there are obvious connections between each plot, which is a complete story. Such as "Star Trek", "Star Wars", "Terminator", etc. are all in this category, but there are more pre-posts and branch episodes, sometimes a little bit of forewords. Relatively speaking, "Harry Potter" is the most rigorous. Not only did the story start and turn like a gear bite, but even the actors did not change-except for the unfortunate death of Richard Harris, from "The Sorcerer's Stone" to "Dead Sacred" is all the same cast. With such a large investment, such a long period, the same story, the same group of main actors (we clearly witnessed their growth and aging), "Harry Potter" is obviously unique in the history of contemporary film.
In fact, this is more like a TV series, which is quite in line with the Miniseries genre in the American TV series, except that the wealthy Warner Company made it on the big screen, with more investment and more dazzling special effects. I have a vague feeling that the success of the "Harry Potter" series may lead to a new trend of "movie series", because with the wide spread of TV series, especially American TV series in recent years, the distance between movies and TV series It has become smaller and smaller, and TV has imitated enough movies. Nowadays, the concept of "TV movie" is well known to women and children, so why can't movies imitate TV? Films made by TV stations are a combination of film and television, and production companies produce series of films ("movie series") in accordance with the model of television dramas. Isn't it also a combination of film and television? "Harry Potter" has been very successful, and if there is a suitable theme in the future, we can do the same ("24 hours" can be considered a successful little test). Apart from other things, I think that if you want to successfully put "Dream of Red Mansions" on the big screen, it is almost the best choice to make an epic "movie series". Of course, having said that, in the future, which U.S. television network will buy the copyright of "Harry Potter", it would be nice to make another TV series that is loyal to the original work. After all, there are too many deleted items in the movie. Of course, Warner has almost done it to the extreme. In order to explain "Dead Sacred" clearly, the life is divided into two episodes. In addition to commercial considerations, it is estimated that it is indeed to prevent the rush of the plot-it must be known that the length of "Half-Blood Prince" has reached For 153 minutes, it really became a soap opera after filming!
But the producer can rest assured that no matter how you shoot, there will never be a shortage of viewers for Harry Potter.
3.
There is no shortage of audiences for the cult's vigor , and of course there is no shortage of young audiences. Of course there are many reasons, I won't say anything else, here is one point: a strong cult style.
Alan Havis used "taboo and arrogance" to make a conclusion on cult films (see Cult Films: Taboo and Transgression, University Press of America, 2007), which hit the nail on the head. In fact, "Harry Potter" does exactly that. You say he is horrible, there is a little bit; you say he is murderous, of course there are many; you say he is violent, but still a lot. But you can't say that this is not a children's film-of course some people say so, but the sound is not mainstream. "Half-Blood Prince" is graded by MPAA as PG-PG is also the mainstream grade of "Harry Potter". In addition, "Goblet of Fire" and "Order of the Phoenix" have become PG-13. It seems that MPAA is still quite a bit Scrupulous (I guess "Dead Sacred" will also be PG-13, maybe even R grade is unknown). "Harry Potter" has gradually become darker and horrible since "You know who he is" gradually appeared, just to give an example: in "The Half-Blood Prince" Dumbledore took Harry to get the Horcrux, and the result was a pond It was full of little monsters crawling out, and the two of them were trapped on an isolated island for a time. That scene even gave me a daze to watch Sam Remy's work.
Therefore, the "Harry Potter" series is completely walking between the mainstream and the cult-and this posture of riding on the fence itself has become a symbol of the cult.
Digging deeper, the cult flavor of "Harry Potter" seems to be fooled from the religious and cultural background. It is said that Rowling, a Scot, has the ambition (or subconscious) to revive Celtic culture through "Harry Potter", and this Celtic culture is naturally anti-(non)Christian. In fact, looking at the seven books and eight books of Harry Potter, you can never see the slightest evidence of God’s existence. The Death Eaters are doing evil, but the Almighty Lord is quietly reclusive-not Shia Islam Imam, what disappeared after playing? The battle between humans and demons was so smoggy, but there was no trace of the church in the world. In fact, even if it portrays the world of Muggles, the film avoids the image of the church—of course, it is smarter than teaching, at least avoiding Dan Brown’s risk at the same time. Therefore, "Harry Potter" has a strong heretical flavor, and this flavor is completely connected with the characteristics of cult movies (if it develops further, it will become a heavy metal in Northern Europe). "Harry Potter", which was born in the Christian world, was born in this way with the heretical cloak of antichrist. With the resurgence of neo-conservatism and the sharp increase in the volume of mainstream religious discourse, you can secretly experience the little pleasure of arrogance in the cinema. "Harry Potter" is obviously an excellent pastime template.
Thinking of this, we must greet Yingming Shenwu’s photoelectric chief chrysanthemum. The MPAA has issued a restriction status. We are still not grading, and we are promoting "Harry Potter" as a children's film with great fanfare. ! Of course, it is also true that you have to say that children do not watch movies. Although "Harry Potter" has dark elements, if it is properly educated, you can still get the essence from the dross. In any case, Aunt Rowling's wonderful pen is still there. Compared with "Looking for Jackie Chan", which pretends to be so hard that his parents don't recognize him, "Harry Potter" can still develop children's intelligence. Moreover, it is widely rumored that the court has its 60th birthday, and "The Founding of a Nation" will exclude imported blockbuster movies and monopolize the three-month schedule. Before the pirated peddlers can celebrate, children can go to the movie theater to see the special effects of "Harry Potter". Don't let them forget that there are movie theaters in China before the Expo.
4. Growth metaphor
I read the meaning of anti-racism and anti-totalism from "Harry Potter" (I don’t ask if Aunt Rowling really thinks so). Whenever I see Death Eaters and the Order of the Phoenix For the matchup, I think of the history of the Nazi Party's levers and the story of Mr. Zhongshan being forced to create a secret society-style Chinese Revolutionary Party-but this is more appropriate after the finale.
Harry Potter grew up slowly, Zhang Qiu left, but Ginny developed a graceful curve. Harry is actually a weak man, inferior to Hermione in terms of talent (he is still a "mudblood"), inferior to Ron in terms of size, and inferior to Malfoy in terms of birth. The weak protagonists in martial arts novels often took over the internal force transmission of their predecessors, or accidentally obtained a martial arts secret book, and then quickly took the position. Harry Potter has nothing, he only has the fateful choice of "you know who he is" (there is the shadow of Christian fate).
Is Harry a hero? He is and he is not. Tolkien said: "Little people make history because they have no choice." Harry Potter just responded to this sentence. But for the demon, growing up strong and without hesitation is itself the biggest blow to Ya.
We watched Harry Potter helplessly deal with his cruel youth. Those terrible things could not be avoided, so let it come.
Whose growth is not like this?
View more about Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince reviews
