Harry Potter News and Commentary
Since this is Scary Movies week at The Hog’s Head, I’m wondering what the pub thinks about the portrayal of frightening elements in Harry Potter on the big screen. Dementors, boggarts, Inferi, Dark Arts, Death Eaters, Voldemort – what works, what doesn’t, and why?
Previous post: Scary Movies Week
Next post: Paranormal Activity and Fear
revgeorge on Favorite Tolkien Middle Earth Quotes
Jonathan on Favorite Tolkien Middle Earth Quotes
korg20000bc on Favorite Movie Quotes!!!korg20000bc on Favorite Tolkien Middle Earth Quotes
Arabella Figg on 2010 Fantasy Movie Previewrevgeorge on 2010 Fantasy Movie Preview
Red Rocker on 2010 Fantasy Movie Preview
Dave the Longwinded on 2010 Fantasy Movie Previewrevgeorge on 2010 Fantasy Movie Preview
Fricka on 2010 Fantasy Movie Preview
Loading ...
{ 63 comments… read them below or add one }
I thought that all the frightening elements were very well done. I am a visual person myself and always create rather grotesque images in my mind while reading the books, and all of the Harry Potter movies have either met or exceeded my expecations.
The dementors were just about my worst fear after the Prizoner of Azkaban was released, while Lord Voldemort’s blood red eyes and snake like face, and the masks of the death eaters hiding their taunting voices haunted my dreams after the release of the Goblet of Fire. Not to mention that the Inferi had me jumping out of my seat both times I went to watch the Half-Blood Prince.
In my opinion the creators of the Harry Potter movies took almost every detail from the books and tried to incorporate it in the scenes, costume designs and characters as close as possible. There can never to be a true and completely honest transition from book to movie, the two mediums are just too different, but so far they have done very well. That is why I think all of the frightening (whether you view them as such or not) elements worked rather well in all the movies.
(My love of all things Potter might make me a bit biased though. ;] )
Well, the special effects were not so great in the first film, so that troll was not so scary. However, the detention in the forest, where Harry encounters “that thing” drinking the Unicorn’s blood was sufficiently scary, I thought, especially the first time when I saw it lift its head and the foam on its mouth. Even though I had read the book and knew that Harry was going to get rescued by centaurs(reduced to one in the film, again a rather cheesy special effect), the background music and Harry
being rooted to the spot were enough to raise my anxiety level. However, it’s the second film where I got my first really thrilling scare–the encounter with Aragog in the forest. That was done quite well, I think. I’m not sure how age appropriate that scene is–for children young enough to get really spooked by arachnids, I’d consider a fast forward over that scene now.
There are different kinds of scary.
The scene in Chamber where Harry and Ron are suddenly completely surrounded by the spiders was ominously scary.
The scene in Prisoner where Harry sees P. Pettigrew’s footprints coming closer to him on the Marauder’s Map, but can’t actually see him was stomach churningly scary – a lot like the scene from Aliens where the detector is going off like crazy but the soldiers can’t actually see any aliens.
The scene in Goblet where “Mad Eye” is questioning Harry about his encounter with Voldemort, with Harry’s growing realization that he’s not Mad Eye was creepy scary.
The scene in Order showing Voldemort standing on the platform at King’s Cross in his civvies was spooky scary.
The scene in Prince where the inferi come out of the water was shockingly, if completely predictably, scary.
And any scene featuring Gambon misreading his lines, having histrionics, startling the horses, hitting children, speaking with a breathless, die-away voice suggestive of a Victorian heroine, is painfully, please make it stop, I’ll do anything if you’ll make it stop scary.
I’m not sure scary describes that last thing you mentioned, Red Rocker, but there are lots of other words that could be used for it.
As bad as some of the effects were in the first two movies, they were better at setting a mood for me. They capture a lot of wonder and joy. And they have some moments that capture fear very well. The unicorn scene Fricka points to from PoS is genuinely frightening to me. PoA did this fairly well with the Dementors, as well.
But, from GoF onward, they’ve tended to go for the cheap thrill in my mind. The most frightening aspects of the last trial in GoF are left out of the film (I’m thinking of the Sphinx, here).
Voldemort as an adult has never been frightening on film to me. Fiennes is a great actor, but there just isn’t anything there for him to work with in the film versions. And at this point, DH-the-book has so thoroughly deflated him to me that I don’t see the films recovering him. Now, the Nagini scene with Bathilda Bagshot… there’s real potential there!
In HBP, Voldemort-as-a-child is far scarier, and I think that’s the case in the book, as well.
There are two moments that shocked the heck out of me, and thus scared me. (even though I was in the know) Both are in GoF.
1. Petergrew’s quick execution of Diggory. It reminded me of Amon Goeth’s senseless execution of the Jewish architect in Schindler’s List.
2. In the graveyard, Voldemort touches Harry’s forehead. Mr. Feinnes then mockingly imitates Harry’s painful screams with a smile on his face. That reminded me of Silence of the Lambs Bill when does the same to the girl in the pit.
Oh and one last one – when Cormac blows chunks on Snape. I’m seriously frightened of all things vomitous.
P.S. I’m sensing Gambon as underdog. I might have to defend him some day. But I’ll pick my battles for now.
I still find the scene in Goblet where Voldemort keeps Harry trapped by the statue creepy. And old man taunting a tied up boy…
One of the scariest scenes in the books (it has not yet been shown in a publicly released film) is Chapter 13 of Hallows in which the trio infiltrate the MOM. Whenever I see a movie in which the hero(ine) sneaks into the lair of the bad guys, I get real nervous until they escape. (James Bond excepted, since I know that some form of deus ex machina will intervene to save him.)
Speaking of Gambon, in what scenes did he startle horses, hit children, or speak in a breathless, die-away voice suggestive of a Victorian heroine? I keep reading in comments here about what a bad job Gambon does as DD. I view of these comments, I reviewed a number of scenes in the movies to compare Richard Harris with Michael Gambon. While they are different, it is not clear to me that Gambon is a disaster. Please enlighten me.
“In view”, not “I view” Sorry
For me, the scariest scene has also not yet appeared in any movie – it’s the scene in Godric’s Hollow when the snake comes out of Bathilda and attacks Harry. I’m pretty sure that on my first read-through of that scene (in the middle of the night) I had to stop reading for a few seconds to slow down the wild beating of my heart!
In the films, I’d have to agree with Red Rocker regarding the Inferi in HBP. That’s also a pretty scary scene in both the movie and the book. Especially in the book since, as a reader, you are wholly swallowed by Harry’s panic and his inability to perform a spell that works against them.
Charlie, for me, Gambon’s biggest failing at portraying Dumbledore happens in GoF during the scene after Harry’s name is pulled out of the goblet. Dumbledore runs at harry and threatens him, yelling “Did you put your name in the Goblet of Fire?!”. This seems to me the complete opposite of how Dumbledore calmly questions and accepts Harry’s statement in the book. There are many other examples, but this is the strongest one for me.
The only thing I found remotely scary/creepy were the Dementors. Very, very well done. You could almost feel the chill.
Ever since the Wizard of Oz and Pinocchio scared the stuffing out of me as a young kid, I have avoided scary and creepy movies and books. No slashers, waswolfs or vampires for me. But I don’t find any of the Harry Potter books/movies very scary, for whatever it is worth.
The GoF movie is something of a mess. There are lots of problems with it besides Gambon. Maybe a re-edited version would help the movie a bit, but we are stuck with Gambon. I don’t have too big a problem with him in the other movies though.
Hmm the scariest (as well as saddest part for me) was Dumbledore’s final hours and then death.
Think about it: He is considered a great wizard and Voldemort is terrified of him.
If Dumbledore isn’t safe, how is anyone else…
Plus the scene in the cave with the inferi.
Any “jumpy” scene I consider to be scary:
- i.e. when Harry is in Knockturn Alley and the Hand of Glory (? was that right?) grabs his hand, still makes me jump
Also I agree the Gambon’s protrayal of Dumbledore in GoF was the worst >_<
Although he has gradually gotten better, there weren't enough movies to bring him up to Richard Harris standards (I think).
Yeah, the snake coming out Bathilda’s neck is pretty gross – and frightening. So is the back of Quirrell’s head. I think in both instances the fear comes from the mutilation of the human body – always good for a gasp and a gulp.
Charlie I was just funning with the scaring horses reference ( bad joke). However, I stand behind all the others: Gambon hits Ron’s broken leg at the end of Prisoner, and he clutches and grabs Harry to get him off Cedric’s dead body near the end of Goblet, he gets all agitated with Harry (as aerisflowers described above) in Goblet, he sits and broods like a Shakespearean tragic figure, and yells in anger at the children in Order.
The breathless, die away, maiden about to faint tone is one he seems to have developed for Prince: I noticed it while watching the trailers. Here are the links to the previous posts where this came up:
http://thehogshead.org/new-half-blood-prince-trailer-1145/
and
http://thehogshead.org/new-half-blood-prince-trailer-2-1246/
and
http://thehogshead.org/new-half-blood-prince-trailer-3-1797/
It didn’t bother me as much in the movies because I’ve found a way of switching Gambon off – stop thinking of what might have been, treat him as background noise and he’s much less irritating.
aerisflowers I reviewed the scene you mentioned in both the movie and the book, and your description of the difference between them is right on. I remember reading somewhere that Gambon had not read any of the books. If that is the case, perhaps that is the reason he does not always capture the book’s DD.
I have to say I’m surprised … we’ve had two people question the dislike of Gambon, and neither revgeorge nor Red Rocker have come to set the record straight on the tragedy that is the casting of Michael Gambon as Albus Dumbledore.
I’ll hold off just a little longer. In the meantime, it’s been a while since I’ve visited the Facebook group, “Remember kids, Snape didn’t kill Dumbledore. Michael Gambon did.”
I had to hold myself back there, becuase I really dislike Michael Gambon’s portrayal of Dumbledore, and there are so many examples that scream to me he clearly has not read the book.
Travis, this facebook group sounds like one I need to join
.
Travis, I was gone all day yesterday, so I couldn’t respond on Gambon. Feel free to exposit on him for us.
I went by the Facebook group today & left my thoughts on seeing Gambon’s DD take the plunge in the HBP movie.
The Inferi in the movie didn’t really do anything for me. Knew it was coming. Has a momentary shock value & then is just kind of there.
The Dementors in POA & to a lesser extent in OOTP were much more effective.
The scene in the forest in HPSS was very good & scary.
Greyback in HBP should’ve been much more scarier.
Now, I’ll have to go back & watch all the movies & see what stands out.
It’s not Gambon’s job to read the books, it’s his job to portray the character as the director is asking him to.
Matthew W, which is exactly why I’ve started to assign just as much if not more blame to the director & the scriptwriter for totally botching the character of Dumbledore.
Certainly, reading the books isn’t a necessity for portraying a character, but I think what irks people is the rather cavalier & brusque attitude Gambon seems to have towards the books.
Plus, there’s a long history of actors providing insight into the character they’re playing & knowing when something seems out of character for the part they’re playing or adding in little details that reinforce the characterization.
Travis, rather than repeat myself on the well-hashed out subject of Gambon’s shortcomings, I wrote a comment linking to my previous comments on the subject. I went back and found three rants which were in reaction to different posts on trailers for Prince. Unfortunately, when you put three links in your comment the spam checker catches it and sits on it.
I was a little surprised, in retrospect, at how irritated I was with Gambon’s readings of his lines. I think it was because I was focusing on him too much. I found him less irritating in the actual movie. He’s no better, but there was so much more to look at that I just didn’t pay him that much attention.
I suppose that too is a sad comment, that one has to ignore one of the central characters in the story in order to enjoy the movie. But so be it.
Sorry for the double post, but I just read some more of the comments above, and have one more thing to say about Gambon.
You note Charlie that Gambon didn’t read the books and maybe that’s why he didn’t capture the essence of the book DD. I have since found out that Sir Michael, playing Mr. Woodhouse in a television version of Miss Austen’s Emma, reported that that was another book he did not read. Failure to read HP is one thing – perhaps he has no respect for children’s literature. But failing to read Jane Austen marks him to be what a character in another famous children’s adventure series would describe as “a velly uncultured man”.
Matthew W, it may be the actor’s job to portray the character as the director asks him to do, but I am a bit skeptical that all actors follow that rule.
I found your one post in the spam catcher, Red Rocker, but I don’t know how to remove it from there & approve it. One of the administrative studs on here will have to do it.
Just sorted it.
Thanks, korg. Anyone who wants to can now access my previous rants through comment #14 above.
OK. It’s high noon and I’m going to walk down the main drag of this town called Michael Gambon.
First, I am going to assume that the gracious and cultured people on this site will have seen or witnessed some of Mr. Gambon’s other work besides Harry Potter. i.e. The Singing Detective, The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover, Sleepy Hollow, Path to War or any of about a thousand or more live performances at the Old Vic or elsewhere. I think we might even be in agreement that this guy has got the goods, the bona fides, a formidable talent in the thespian world.
Second, I’m going to assume you heard and believe this rumor that Mr. Gambon has not read a book in his entire life (outside of reading and memorizing about 1,000 pages of script per year). I am also going to assume that you believe everything that comes out of Mr. Gambon’s mouth in interviews is true.
Lastly, I am going to assume that you believe that the Harry Potter films are truly good adaptations of the books.
I’ll start with the last first.
As much as I respect Mr. Kloves, please know that he wrote these scripts not the novels. Description of action regularly occurs in script. As well as some direction for actors. Second, contrary to popular belief, actors depend on the director for instruction on how to play a scene. They trust the director not to make a fool of them. This is true and still very much a reality in filmmaking today. If you think an actor makes a decision that is in the final cut, you are mistaken. That’s why there are so many takes, so the director or editor has a choice of which direction to take the film. Now not all the differences in performance are as big as night and day, but they are subtle differences, if the director is worth his salt (with the exception of Spielberg, who knows what he wants from the get go and won’t give his editors an option). Now I’m not saying Mike Newell or Cuaron or Yates would dare to give Mr. Gambon an exact line reading, but they are the ones that are steering the ship so speak. And after that, it is usually the editor who chooses the footage.
These films have never really been good adaptations after Chamber of Secrets. I think we, and all of Hollywood knows that. I’m sorry, but it’s true.
Going up the list, one has to realize that actors are different animals than us. They hide and reveal as part of their jobs. They’re insecure quite often and constantly question their motives (one of my favorite stories is when an actor asked Alfred Hitchcock what his motivation was for a particular scene and Mr. Hitchcock said “Your salary.”). They do interview after interview, being asked the same lame questions like why did you play so and so like this? Well, most actors would either have to give you a 100 page thesis or maybe, they simply don’t know how they do it – and that would destroy the magic of the great actor. And some actors buck at these simpleton questions. Mr. Gambon is one. He lies in his interviews, he makes up stories, he prevaricates, he’s basically the naughty Irish lad fooling the nuns. Why – I don’t know. It doesn’t help him outwardly. He certainly has a cornucopia of problems to hide in his personal life so I don’t fault him and frankly don’t care or even put any investment in it as truth. There is evidence however to the contrary that Mr. Gambon has in fact read the books (or at least snuck a peek at them). See the interview about the PoA and see if you can find it.
Finally, I will address Mr. Gambon’s choices as actor.
The universal feeling is that Mr. Gambon “startled the horses” when he ran to Harry in GoF, shook him and asked him if he put his name in the cup (By the way RR – that came from you and I have to admit it was at least a two-minute laugh out loud for me). But for me it was like the Harry Potter series finally woke up out of its stupor. Here was a Dumbledore that was different and intriguing to me. He was no longer the wizard so sure of his powers but was set off-kilter. And now we know after reading book 7 – he was starting to arc in the opposite direction at this time in the books as one big book. Also, Mr. Gambon’s use of menace in his last lines of dialogue made me realize Albus might not be who I thought he was.
As much as I loved the comfort of the full circle of seeing Richard Harris as Wart and then Merlin, Mr. Harris did not indicate a change or growth of character. In fact, quite the opposite. But Mr. Harris was already very sick at the time. And I love Richard Harris like no other since I was a child watching a Camelot rerun on tv. But he didn’t take me on a ride like Mr. Gambon has.
Mr. Gambon has opened up this preconception of Albus Dumbledore for me, and I think it has been fairly prescient. The arc of Dumbledore and Snape cross each other and just like Merlin in The Once and Future King, he ages backwards for me.
Alright enough! I was supposed to shoot ‘em up and get out of Dodge quickly, but I’ve lingered too long.
Saw Gambon in The Singing Detective and Gosford Park, didn’t pay any attention to him in Sleepy Hollow or Mary Reilly. Haven’t seen any of the others.
Loved him in Singing Detective. It’s been a while, but what I remember was a totally neurotic man, totally immersed in self-pity, very hurtful to those who had the misfortune to care for him, whose only redeeming feature was his acerbic intelligence. Found he fit the role he played in Gosford Park – a wonderful movie, btw – of an arrogant, powerful, coarse man whose death was impossible to mourn. So yes for the acting chops.
But these were both contemporary roles, of unheroic men, men who could not be heroic because they could not transcend their own weaknesses and could not see greatness in others.
I’m not saying Gambon can not be heroic. Just that I haven’t seen him be so. And I think the way he approaches Dumbledore reflects what I saw in the earlier examples: a flawed man who does not regret his flaws, and sees others through a filter of weary cynicism which doesn’t allow for heroes. A 2oth century man.
It’s possible to see Dumbledore this way, I guess. And I would agree that there are some elements of truth in there. But I think that it misses large chunks of what Dumbledore is about.
BTW, when I Googled Gambon’s roles, I saw that he’d played Oscar Wilde in a tv series. Now that, I think, would be good casting.
Either I’ve stunned everyone into silence defending Michael Gambon or everyone’s asleep, or no one cares after all this talk about Gambon.
Bummer.
Oh whoops! there you are Red Rocker. Glad to see some response.
Oh, I give up.
OK, I’ll take the bait, Joivre. Forgive me if I’m a bit too forceful, but Gambon drives me nuts.
You must mean, the Harry Potter movie series, because the HP series had plenty of life and no stupor up till this point. But even then … this Dumbledore you think Gambon portrays doesn’t show up till book 7, so even if Gambon is more like what we’ve learned is the “real” Dumbledore (and I don’t think he is), it’s waaaay too early for that. Dumbledore’s mysterious and almost entirely unshaken till Book 7.
Oh, it’s been a ride alright. I’ve had to hate major portions of the movies I think are better done than the first couple … which makes it quite an experience! I’d rather like the movies start to finish, but my favorite character gets turned into a cranky, worried old man.
Harris would have developed Dumbledore at exactly the right pace, and anyone who’s watched Gladiator knows Harris can play the man with deep regrets and need for repentance at the end of his life.
I was just about to go to bed when I read this. You don’t know how fun that is for me to read this. But as I have already took my heart medicine, I must fall asleep soon. I will counter your countersubject tomorrow morning. I thank you kindly Travis for you kind opposition. It makes my life fun.
Bis Morgan,
Joivre
I’m not saying anything against Michael Gambon as an actor, nor do I pass judgement against any of his other roles. I do actually believe that he’s a good actor and I also have never even heard a rumor stating that Michael Gambon has never read a book. When I said that it is clear to me he has never read HP, I merely meant that comment based on what I see when I watch the films. My problem is with his portrayal of Dumbledore. Also, I do understand that to some extent that the director and editor influence the way that we as the audience see the performance. However, I agree with revgeorge in comment 21 that it is also the job of the actor to bring their own interpretation to the character that they are playing. I think that all great actors are not so simply because they follow direction.
I should also mention that I did not think that Richard Harris made a good Dumbledore either. There is no way that his Dumbledore could have battled Volemort in the ministry (as it occurs in the books).
I don’t have time right now to put together a list of all the examples where Gambon falls short as Dumbledore, several of which have been listed by people already in the comments, but in my mind there are many.
Joivre, all I can say is, be patient. I saw your comment earlier but didn’t really have a chance to spend any time responding. I don’t spend all my days & nights running down Michael Gambon, you know.
Couldn’t agree less. The first two films may be perfect facsimiles of the books, but they are lifeless as a result. A good adaptation is just that – it adapts, changes, embellishes and enhances the book for a new medium.
Azkaban is the first good Harry Potter film, and probably still the best.
Joivre,
Like revgeorge said- be patient. You don’t need to post your disappointment that people haven’t responded within 30mins of you making a comment. It clutters the conversation and people will get round to things when they have time.
thehogshead.org is discussion site not a chat room, after all.
Thanks.
Matthew
Ahem! I am going to put on my school teacher hat here, and remind some of you that the title of this thread is ” Scary Harry: Frightening Moments in Harry Potter films,” NOT “Is Michael Gambon a disgrace to the role of Dumbledore?” Travis, perhaps you could begin a separate place where those people who want to discuss all the pro’s and con’s of Michael Gambon’s acting abilities could place their comments, and those of Us(at least, ME) would like to get back ON TOPIC and discuss scenes we found frightening or scary in the films.
Towards that end, I have to say that in POA, the transformation of Lupin into a Werewolf, and the fact that he no longer recognized Hermione after his complete transforming, was scary. That way that the WW roared at Harry, with foam coming out of its mouth, after Harry had thrown a stone at it to distract it from Sirius was frightening to me. I think that had I not read the book, and seen the film without benefit of reading the book first, I would have had an expectation to see someone get killed rather quickly after that. The Dementor scene where they are coming after Sirius and Harry, and starting to suck out the soul and life of Sirius was also disturbing. (BTW, I’ve noticed other films using that FX technique since then, and it’s still a disturbing thing to watch.)
I guess I didn’t see the disconnect in topics because Gambon’s portrayal of Dumbledore one of the scariest things of the films.
It’s been an unwritten rule of mine for years that discussion of Gambon’s Dumbledore is an allowable tangent in any and all threads.
I guess that rule is no longer unwritten.
We’ve spent enough time on him in the past several years that a dedicated thread wouldn’t be very helpful, I don’t think. So I’m willing to tolerate the occasional outburst.
That said, this one is turning into a much lengthier, point by point discussion which will probably make it difficult to get back to the topic at hand.
So: Everyone who wants to continue discussion on Gambon, please move the conversation to a previous Gambon debate and take it up there. I’d suggest reviewing some of our previous discussions and picking up from there. A good starting place would be any of the three posts Red Rocker linked in comment #14 above.
Sorry – patience is unfortunately a virtue I have yet to acquire.
I promise not to repost again. 
Thanks Frika for getting us back on topic! It’s been a while since I last saw POA and you are definately right about the warewolf scene. (and as a side note, Snape jumping in front of the trio to protect them was very telling!).
I think your comment about having read the book beforehand definately rings true with me. I think for all the scary moments listed in the comments above I would have been much more scared if I didn’t know the outcome of each scene.
Sorry, Travis, I guess I’m enough of a newbie here that I did not realize there was an unwritten rule about discussing Michael Gambon as Dumbledore. *sigh* That’s the problem with unwritten rules, I think–sooner or later, someone comes along who is clueless to the unwritten rule and then it has to be written out. [Yes, I am describing myself as the clueless one here!'-)]
Anyway, I agree with Aerisflowers that Snape’s jumping in front of the trio should have been a major clue to his true role in the series. Getting back to Lupin’s transformation, there’s a couple of seconds where, when he just has seen the moon and begins to transform, that I think in retrospect are truly horrifying–that slack-jaw look as Remus Lupin, the wizard who is the teacher of three of those present, and a close friend to another, begins to lose himself in the transformation. Even Sirius’ attempted intervention is little use–he is still turning into a mindless killing machine. Now, THAT’s truly frightening to me.
In GOF, I found the Dragon scenes a bit drawn out, but I must admit, that Newell’s having the dragon escape its chains made the scene much more heart-pounding. In the book, after all, since the dragon was contained by a chain, there wasn’t the same sense of fear for Harry that I felt when he had to fly off with the dragon in hot pursuit. That place where he, in avoiding running into the dragon, crashed into one of the Castle’s windows, and temporarily lost his Firebolt, and had to drop down to try to get it while the dragon was trying to crawl down and get him made my anxiety level rise, and I think if I had been about 30 years younger, I might have messed my pants there. Harry’s grabbing the broom and then dropping into the abyss-like depths of the air was also scary for me–but part of that is because I have a fear of heights. Luckily with the DVD I can fast forward, or skip over that part now. Strangely enough, the lake challenge wasn’t all that frightening to me, but I did find the Maze suitably frightening. The parts where the Maze tries to wrap up Cedric and Fleur was scary–”Plants gone wild!” BTW, there is a difference between a labyrinth and a Maze–a labyrinth, if followed correctly, will lead a person out to the exit, where a Maze exists for the purpose to throw a person off balance–in short, to “amaze”. Although I sort of was disappointed at first that there was to be no Sphinx or giant Blast-ended Skrewts, the Maze in the film was sufficiently sinister to be truly spooky. And, that’s all before Harry and Cedric and Harry are taken by the portkey to theGraveyard where Wormtail and his companion are waiting for them. Brrrr!
Heh heh. Just one Harry needed there in that trip! I didn’t catch that in time on my first preview.
Yes Fricka – I always wanted to see a blast-ended skrewt! I’m not sure if I’d gasp in horror or laugh at it though. Another fright was Fluffy. He was big and bad and slobbery! Sometimes I confuse being frightened with being grossed out. On the gross out scale, Ron spewing slugs was a 10.
I agree, Joivre, Ron’s burping slugs is a 10 on the gross-out score. I still laugh when Hagrid says, “Better out than in.” Scary to think of those slugs churning around in Ron’s stomach, or even worse, coming out the other end! (Sorry! My bawdy sense of humor couldn’t resist that last!)
Just want to put in my $.02 on the Dementors. I actually don’t really find them scary (in the movies) at all, particularly in PoA. The one on the train looks to me like a helium ballon with a torn sheet hanging over it. However, I think the rattling-breath sound effect is quite good. During the scene at the lake with Harry and Sirius I thought that having dementors swoop in and out was more distracting than scary. It really bothered me that in the movie they can fly.
The image I have in mind from the book was of these tall figures drifting closer to H and S, surrounding them with no means of escape, looming over them, one of them breaking from the masses, slowly leaning down ready to Kiss Sirius, in the back ground Harry trying and failing to produce a patronus. In the movie I did not get the same sense of claustrophobia that I got from the book.
I thought that their design and implementation in OotP where definately more effective. They seemed more earth-bound, less floaty sheet-like and more intimidating.
Eeeeeewwwwe! Fricka!
Ever see a kitten infested with tapeworms?
I am officially reporting you both to Percy Weasley. Especially Red Rocker for that gross post. And believe me, he’s probably already seen this gortesque posts and will chastise you all the way from New Zealand. (Just like I’ve been chastised). Fair is fair.
Aerisflowers – Though I agree with you on the dementor stuff. I keep getting tripped up by your statement “slowly leaning down ready to Kiss Sirius” All of a sudden I wished I could be a dementor. Would love to kiss him helpless.
I was never sure why JKR called it the Dementor’s Kiss. Was it a parody of a real kiss? Was it meant to be the opposite of the Kiss of Life which, over there across the pond, stands for mouth-to-mouth resuscitation? Was it an allusion to the kiss of death delivered by members of the Mafia prior to sending the recipent off to sleep with the fishes?
I think it would have been more logical – if not as poetical – to call it the Dementor’s Suck. It may not be elegant, but it sure as heck is a more apt description of what actually happens.
Somehow – Dementor’s suck cracks me up. But there is a strange beauty in kissing someone’s soul away. But yes, I agree it’s somehow not right.
I think that the name Dementor’s Kiss makes it all the more disturbing. Joivre, I think that your choice of the phrase “strange beauty” is really appropriate. The Dementor’s Kiss is such a perversion of a the idea of a kiss, but there is a real elegance to the phrase and how it describes what is essentially a monster’s method of attack.
Neatly put Aerisflowers.
Genestealers from Games Workshop’s Warhammer 40000 universe infect humans with a similar parody of a “kiss”
I agree, Red Rocker, the Dementors in the film version of OOTP were much scarier than in POA. However, the scene where the Dementor first comes on the train in POA, with those loooong black fingers opening the window first was pretty scary. Unfortunately, LOTR had already opened with its version of the Nazgul, and I think Curaon was experimenting with figures that would be as scary, but not obviously derivative of the LOTR figures. His experiment wasn’t altogether a failure, they just weren’t as successfully frightening as the Nazgul were. I’ve always had the suspicion that by the time Yates came on board, some of the artists who helped create the Nazgul might have been available for use on fine-tuning the Dementors. (Or Yates might have just figured out where the POA Dementors failed on the fright scale, and corrected that). Anyway, the scene where Harry and Dudley is attacked is really first rate frightening, I think.
(Sorry, Joivre, didn’t mean to gross you out so much!)
It was aerisflowerswho made the observation that the D men were scarier in Order than in Prisoner
I don’t find the D men visually frightening (I think it’s because of their trailing shrouds: the ragged edges are distracting because they give me the urge to grab a pair of scissors and make the hems even).
Speaking of the mundane intruding on the spooky, have any of you read Oscar Wilde’s The Canterville Ghost? It’s very funny, and strangely reminiscent of the dominant theme of the Harry Potter books.
Oscar Wilde is a personal hero of mine but it’s been some time since I read The Canterville Ghost. My favourite book of all time is The Picture of Dorian Gray. The portrait itself is quite like a horcrux, don’t you think?
You are right, RR, it WAS aerisflowers who wrote the comments about the POA Dementors not being so frightening. Sorry about that, aerisflowers. I guess I didn’t read far enough in the back chat to catch that properly. Also, I find Tom’s comment about Oscar Wilde and the Picture of Dorian Gray very interesting. I recently watched a DVD version of a production of that story(THINK it was done by the BBC, but can’t swear to it). Once again, I think JKR has taken an idea that has been floating around for awhile, and given it her own twist. Voldemort does resemble Dorian at first, and by that I mean that we now know that he had killed his father and grandparents while he was still a student at Hogwarts. Slughorn saw him with the Gaunt Ring on his hand, and at THAT time, there was nothing about his appearance to indicate that he was so deep into Dark Magic. However, by the time he gets “reborn” in GOF, he hardly resembles the handsome Prefect he had been in his Hogwarts days.
(Slits for nostrils and red eyes not being all that appealing to look at, but more indicative of the true personality coming out).
In the film representations of Voldemort, I personally find the Tom Riddle in COS most chilling. He’s still a handsome fellow, and he’s managed to make Harry think he’s on his side, until he gets hold of Harry’s wand. THEN he reveals his identity. Note that Harry didn’t seem all that concerned about a possible connection between himself and Voldemort until after COS.
That is a brilliant observation, Tom: a lot like a horcrux. It might even be said to be a prototype.
You’re absolutely right Fricka and I agree that Christian Coulson’s portrayal of Riddle is highly charismatic.
With regards to the Dorian Gray connection, note also that Dorian describes the portrait as his “soul”. It is implied that the portrait may indeed contain a part of his soul as at the end of the story after stabbing it he himself dies, similar to Voldemort becoming mortal after the destruction of his horcruxes. Another connection is that both Dorian and Voldemort are narcissists but whereas Dorian’s narcissism was somantic, like that of the original Narcissus, Voldemort’s is more cerebral.
I think the scariest HP film to date is definitely The Half-Blood Prince. The films are very much horror for kids, rather like Coraline (though the book is significantly scarier). I love the way the films can create a gothic, moody atmosphere through the use of heavy rain and music. On one side we have an aura of cosy, domestic happiness with Harry and his friends laughing in the rich warmth of the Gryffindor Common Room or dining on banquets in the great hall.
And on the other side we have Dementors prowling the Hogwarts grounds killing wildlife with their presence, Bellatrix and Fenrir Greyback skulking in the wet reeds around the Weasley family home and of course we’re shown the everpresent spectral presence of Voldemort lurking in graveyards or in Harry’s dreams, plotting, waiting for the right moment to strike. The films are adept at creating a contrast between the warm glow of the inside and the cold yet strangely seductive darkness of the outside where lie the unknown and the wild. Oh dear, I’ve got my storytelling hat on again.
Good points about Tom Riddle (and Christian Coulson) in CoS – I definately agree. Just wanted to add that I find moments like the scene with Riddle in the Chamber, and Dolores’s detention scenes to be much more frightening (maybe disturbing is a bettter word…) than the monster scenes. Moments when humans are being their worst, taking pleasure in the pain of others, are more bone chilling than any kind of beastie.