Raef:
Hm, I would definitely disagree with some of the cast about Deathly Hallows pt. 1's trueness to the book. I've read all the books numerous times, seen the movies numerous times, and I would say this movie is easily much more true to the book than any of the others (post Columbus of course). I personally thought this movie was so good that it made up for the 4th, 5th, and 6th movies. Maybe because Michael Gambon wasn't in it ruining Dumbledore's character, or that Emma Watson has gotten her eyebrow acting under control. On top of it all, this was the first movie where I noticed J.K. Rowlings role as producer. Not sure if this is the first one she co-produced or I just might not have noticed it before.

Just my 2 cents.

Something I'm frequently flamed for is my fondness for the 3rd movie, prisoner of Azkaban. In my opinion, the only movie that had a creatively stylized interpretation, and fantastic cinematography which made up its storyline detail deficiencies. Alfonso Cuarón was the director of that one.

Azunai:
Hm, I would definitely disagree with some of the cast about Deathly Hallows pt. 1's trueness to the book. I've read all the books numerous times, seen the movies numerous times, and I would say this movie is easily much more true to the book than any of the others (post Columbus of course). I personally thought this movie was so good that it made up for the 4th, 5th, and 6th movies. Maybe because Michael Gambon wasn't in it ruining Dumbledore's character, or that Emma Watson has gotten her eyebrow acting under control. On top of it all, this was the first movie where I noticed J.K. Rowlings role as producer. Not sure if this is the first one she co-produced or I just might not have noticed it before.

Just my 2 cents.

Something I'm frequently flamed for is my fondness for the 3rd movie, prisoner of Azkaban. In my opinion, the only movie that had a creatively stylized interpretation, and fantastic cinematography which made up its storyline detail deficiencies. Alfonso Cuarón was the director of that one.


OMG Respect for you has skyrocketed, both for the trueness to the book remark, and Azkaban fandom! I love the wand sounds in azkaban, the lighting, and of course as you said the cinematography

Story wise, there were small parts left out, but they were trivial in comparrison, this film story wise was much much better than say the order of the phoenix, I mean.. Longest book, smallest film.

Eloysius:
Azkaban is up there for me as well - it just didn't come to mind as having the best moments when it came down to picking my favorites - that said, I definitely think Azkaban had the best art direction, cinematography, music and overall mood of the HP films. David Yates has brought a lot of darkness to the series, but not as much style.

esamenoi:
Aye Askaban for me is probs my favourite.

But although I haven't yet listened to the cast I have to say I don't feel it was all that true to the books... Having read it god knows how many times.

The beginning was where it started going wrong.

Don't get me wrong though I did enjoy the film but it didn't quite live up to what I wanted...

Eloysius:
Esa - your reaction to the movies is why I didn't read any of the books. I'm waiting until after I see them all to start - that way the books are more like the "extended cut" of the movies.

esamenoi:
Now that would have been a good plan. But honestly I don't have that much self control!

Hence why I'm up at 2 in the morning because I've been reading another book I can't sodding put down!

Are you a quick reader?

Eloysius:
Nah - not really a quick reader - I read like it's a movie - even often listen to soundtracks and think inflections and tone of voice - so it can be kind of slow. I'm a very visual person, even in my head - so basically speed reading just becomes like a data dump, and I never do that if I'm trying to enjoy something. All that said, and I have been known to occasionally blow through a book.

esamenoi:
Well I'm a quick reader and I still enjoy it and can tell you exactly what happens :)

And in that case you could start reading now... :D

Tsumari:
Azkaban was the best of the movies in my opinion. I just came home from seeing 7pt.1 and haven't listened to the show yet, so that is the extent of the commentary that I can add.

esamenoi:
I'm totally with Claire on most of what she said.

Books are, by a long way. Much better than the films however most of them are a reasonable representation of the books. Even if they do miss lots out.

With regards to Deathly Hallows - Part one again I agree with Claire, its seriously missing things from the book. Starting with the first two scenes. In the book you don't see what Hermione does to her parents though she does mention it by saying that she has bewitched her parents into thinking they don't have a daughter and that their lifes ambition is to move to Australia. You also should have seen in that first bit (if they are actually trying to set the scene) was what Ron did to make sure the ministry thought he wasn't with Harry. Plus the scene with the Dursleys was really really good in the book. Not so much in the film.

The other thing is the meeting with Voldemort and his followers at the Malfoys house. There is a lot of detail missing there as to who is who. AND Pius Thicknesse is.


BUT it was a good film I think if it didn't have a book.

AnimatorChris:
I finally got around to listening to this Podcast which I must say, I haven't laughed that hard in a while =D Loved the remark on the "White dumbledore" lol. Is there going to be anymore The Screens in the coming future? I really enjoy listening to them.

Oh and Deathly Hallows part 1 comes out of DvD this Friday anyone thinking if buying it?

Eloysius:
Hey Animator - welcome! We're concentrating on the main show right now - but I'd guess it's possible you might hear another Screen later this year.

bluekornchips:
What about a regular show, eh? I recall Mike saying there'd be another show if a screaming TC video was posted :p

Beatlejuice:
This became one of the better movies of the series since the first 2. Could be due to being able to being in 2 parts and only having to tackle half of a book in the same time. The details were more honest to the book.

Far as the Duddley scene, it was included in the extra scenes in the 3 disc blu ray. It came off far more odd then the book laid it out and really was needed to not be included as they portrayed it.

The dance scene between Hermonie and Harry was not in the book. It took the idea that their was a brief chance that they could have an interest in each other. Maybe it added to the movie but I can't recall it from the book.

I always describe Order of the Phoenix as a summation of the Cliff Notes of the book. I thought it was paper thin and I believe the shortest movie even though it was the longest book. It seemed after each movie got the series more attention, they had more interest to pump them out faster and faster.

The books make the story infinite amounts deeper then the movies. Speaking to the movies I found Chamber of secrets to be the best until DH pt 1. I thought 3 and 4 butchered the story in the details. Of course due to time constraints. The worst being Azkaban.

Don't know if the movies will stand up, the books I think will stand as being a superbly woven story with huge rich details and twists.

You want a book that totally sucked compared to the book, Die Hard. Book was called something else but it was horrible.

Tsumari:
I thought 3 and 4 butchered the story in the details. Of course due to time constraints. The worst being Azkaban.
You're actually the first person I've heard say that, and I couldn't realistically disagree more. I thought the first two, with the exception of Richard Harris as Dumbledore, were average at best and overall very forgettable.

Azkaban, like DHpt1, did what most of the series has failed to do. Instead of trying to be absoulutely true to the story and cram in as many plot elements from the books as possible, it actually took some time to sit, breathe, and show us the emotional sides of the characters. That, in my opinion, is more important. If you want the nitty-gritty, meticulous version of the story, go read the books. These are *adaptations,* not translations... and Azkaban was the most successful "adaptation" so far, where I am concerned.

And Alfonso Cuaron is just a genius director. If you've never studied film you may not have noticed this as much as I did, but looking at film as a craftsman's game, I find it hard to argue that any other director attached to the series has done a better job. Chris Columbus (who directed 1 and 2) had none of the artistic and aesthetic flair you see in Cuaron's style.

Beatlejuice:
I have never studied film. I thought that trying to be too artistic though made the film skip so much of the story that makes Rowling's books so great. Sure, you can't include everything but instead of showing me a bird fluttering around the ground for 30 seconds to transition between seasons, tell me the things they didn't have time for. I found that I was less interested in Cuaron's take on the series. Maybe it was more artistic, but for me, not as entertaining. Guess I am a purest when it comes to books being brought to movies and mutilated...almost always so much the worst. I can't understand what became so much darker in scope in 3 compared to 2. Chamber of Secrets was a dark movie and story. I think people think that because the first big change in the actors was in Azkaban. I found Chamber to have a much more frightening atmosphere to it. Again though, just 2 varying views on it.