![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
alonewiththemoonforgot to add in my last entry, I saw Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire on Saturday night.
I have to admit that I haven't read any books since the second one--our pop culture is so inundated by the stories I almost felt like I haven't needed to, plus although I certainly agree they are good books, I'm into the more philosophical branches of fantasy and sci-fi these days. Except for when I read trash, and then I want it to be about a strong kickass female hero ;-) So that being said, there might be things in the book that if I knew might have changed my enjoyment of the film.
I am probably being oversensitive, but I am sure that none of you will be surprised to hear that the sight of a ferret, even if it is a CGI ferret and actually Malfoy, being twisted around in the air while the heroes I was supposed to admire laughed was somewhat upsetting to me. Yes, Moody was actually a bad man in disguise, and we should never feel sorry for Malfoy, but I can't help my gut reaction. And here's where reading the book and having more information might make a difference, and I know I will sound somewhat ridiculous here, but I was surprised to find myself upset by the idea that the wizards would capture perfectly lovely wild dragons minding their own business and subject them to death just so that they could test their students (that's aside from the issue of why it's ok to endanger the students). If it were bears or lions or pit bulls or even roosters we'd have no problem seeing it as barbaric. I felt very sad for the dragon Harry lured to its death. Why did it have to die? If Harry can talk to snakes, surely he could have tried talking to the dragon?
Anyway, as I said, I know I'm being a bit ridiculous and hypersensitive, but these things happening early on in the movie affected my enjoyment of the whole. It was good as far as it went, but I didn't find it went very far. The whole coming of age thing was touching, but it's been done better elsewhere.
Ralph Fiennes though--good casting there.
I have to admit that I haven't read any books since the second one--our pop culture is so inundated by the stories I almost felt like I haven't needed to, plus although I certainly agree they are good books, I'm into the more philosophical branches of fantasy and sci-fi these days. Except for when I read trash, and then I want it to be about a strong kickass female hero ;-) So that being said, there might be things in the book that if I knew might have changed my enjoyment of the film.
I am probably being oversensitive, but I am sure that none of you will be surprised to hear that the sight of a ferret, even if it is a CGI ferret and actually Malfoy, being twisted around in the air while the heroes I was supposed to admire laughed was somewhat upsetting to me. Yes, Moody was actually a bad man in disguise, and we should never feel sorry for Malfoy, but I can't help my gut reaction. And here's where reading the book and having more information might make a difference, and I know I will sound somewhat ridiculous here, but I was surprised to find myself upset by the idea that the wizards would capture perfectly lovely wild dragons minding their own business and subject them to death just so that they could test their students (that's aside from the issue of why it's ok to endanger the students). If it were bears or lions or pit bulls or even roosters we'd have no problem seeing it as barbaric. I felt very sad for the dragon Harry lured to its death. Why did it have to die? If Harry can talk to snakes, surely he could have tried talking to the dragon?
Anyway, as I said, I know I'm being a bit ridiculous and hypersensitive, but these things happening early on in the movie affected my enjoyment of the whole. It was good as far as it went, but I didn't find it went very far. The whole coming of age thing was touching, but it's been done better elsewhere.
Ralph Fiennes though--good casting there.
