Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

The KWMdB.

Moderators: sgt.null, dANdeLION

Post Reply
User avatar
Revan
Drool Rockworm's Servant
Posts: 14284
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 1:08 pm

Post by Revan »

Why is it... that people didn't complain when Lord of the Rings had parts skipped out, and said "Oh, but they couldn't done that, there wasn't enough time". yet when it comes to Harry Potter, people just expect everything in the books to be in the film... hmmm... :P heh :P
Top
User avatar
CovenantJr
Lord
Posts: 12608
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2002 9:10 pm
Location: North Wales

Post by CovenantJr »

Because LOTR, for its myriad faults, is a work of depth and complexity. Harry Potter isn't. If LOTR is roast beef and yorkshire pudding with assorted fresh vegetables, Potter is a glass of water :P

Anyway, I seem to recall there was some objection to missing bits of the LOTR films.
Top
User avatar
Revan
Drool Rockworm's Servant
Posts: 14284
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 1:08 pm

Post by Revan »

CovenantJr wrote:Because LOTR, for its myriad faults, is a work of depth and complexity. Harry Potter isn't. If LOTR is roast beef and yorkshire pudding with assorted fresh vegetables, Potter is a glass of water :P
ROTFLMAO!!! So true! :LOLS:
CovenantJr wrote:Anyway, I seem to recall there was some objection to missing bits of the LOTR films.
Very little though. :P
Top
theDespiser
<i>Haruchai</i>
Posts: 568
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2003 3:58 am
Location: FL

Post by theDespiser »

yeah, see, the stuff they took out of LOTR was replaced nicely, dealt with nicely, and glossed over so the movie was fluid and still explained stuff...


harry potter didnt have that
Think on that, and be dismayed

What do you do to a man who has lost everything?

Give him back something broken
Top
User avatar
Revan
Drool Rockworm's Servant
Posts: 14284
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 1:08 pm

Post by Revan »

Very true also 8)
Top
Post Reply

Return to “Flicks”