Guest reviewer!

A special treat for you today! My dad saw Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince this weekend while in Mexico, and he wrote me a short review, which I told him I'd post on his behalf. So please enjoy the succinct stylings of my pops:

Dad: Can I write my one paragraph H. Potter review for you?
Kat: Yes please.
Dad: This movie was made to suck money out of persons who enjoyed the previous ones... It smelled like ass, looked like ass, and was ass! That's my review!
Kat: Really! Wow.
Dad: And you can quote my ass!
Kat: I will.
Dad: The last Harry Potter movie that I saw with subtitles was when I was with you in Prague and the subtitles were in Czech... It was great! The Spanish subtitles that were on the movie I saw last night in Monterrey, Mexico were more exciting than the movie! What a bore!

So there you have it folks. Hopefully my dad will do some more guest reviewing in the future.

the end of an era

Last night I finally finished Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, thus finishing the series by J.K. Rowling which has been with me throughout my adolescence. I got the book for Christmas when I was in sixth grade, and I remember desperately wishing that I would be invited to the American version of Hogwarts school of Witchcraft and Wizardry on my eleventh birthday. I must say that I was wholly impressed by this seventh book of the series, and am so glad that I elected not to watch the fifth movie recently, so that I could read the final book while maintaining my mental images of the world of Harry Potter.

(SPOILERS!)

1. Severus Snape. As soon as we jumped into the Pensieve and saw him as a little boy, abused and lonely and enamored...I lost it. I didn't stop crying until the end of the book. I was amazed at Rowling's ability to suck me into Harry's frame of mind. Since book six I had totally believed Snape to be wholly evil, and as Harry began wondering what Dumbledore was really like in life, I began wondering what Snape was all about that would have kept him in Dumbledore's good graces. The moment I realized what Snape's childhood and adolescence was like, I was in total sympathy for him, and mourning his death. He really did share something with Harry in that he probably could have suited Gryffindor or Slytherin, and was incredibly brave throughout his turmoil. This morning after a night's sleep, it dawned on me that his last words as Harry peered into his dying face were, "Look at me," because he wanted to look into Lily's green eyes one last time...beautifully written.

2. The deaths. I was incredibly sad when Hedwig and Dobby died. I really didn't feel like I expected that or that those were necessary. I can understand that killing Fred was necessary in a sense that not all of the Weasleys were going to make it, but still. Mad-Eye's death didn't affect me as much as I'm sure it did some people, because I never really made a connection to him. And I expected Lupin, the last of the Marauders, by that point, to join his old friends, but Tonks' death was certainly unnecessary. Okay, so now Harry's godson Teddy is an orphan like Harry, to be raised by his grandmother, like Neville. Cool, but I'm still distraught, J.K.

3. Harry's death. I figured that "Harry is a horcrux" was a pretty obvious conclusion from the end of book 6, but about halfway through book 7 I expected Ron to be the one to die (I really thought one of the Big Three would have to die). Of course, when Ron and Hermione made out I knew that it had to be Harry, but it wasn't until the scene in King's Cross that I understood how the series could end with Harry remaining The Boy Who Lived.

4. The epilogue and the unanswered questions. Look, I get that the epilogue was totally trite and cheesy. So what? This is a children's series that has grown up in its voice with each book, and the epilogue provided and perfect bookend to the whole thing. Certainly for a moment I was rolling my eyes thinking, "Oh, gee, I'm sure that all the childhood sweethearts lived happily ever after," until I realized that that was exactly what I wanted. Certainly I want to know what George is up to with Weasley's Wizard Wheezes (is Percy working for him?), how things are for McGonagall as Headmistress (I hope), and whether or not Luna and Dean decided to hook it up just for the hell of it. Also, I really would love to know what became of the Dursleys. Now knowing that Petunia was just jealous and Dudley is not that bad, I wonder what life is like for them.

(END SPOILERS!)

I was very pleased with how, in each book, the characters' and the readers' knowledge of and familiarity with the magical world (spells, possibilities, places, history, etc.) has increased so that by the time the book wrapped up, they were full-on adult wizards, using Unforgivable Curses and Apparating and practicing magic without the difficulty they had as novices. And the final epic scenes taking place at Hogwarts, hearkening back to some of the greatest things we've come to love over the years, was much appreciated.

And now I am curious to see how history will treat the Harry Potter series. How will my children react to them, not having grown up with all of the hype surrounding them? I want to try as hard as possible to make my kids wait a year in between each book, but I don't know how effective that will be because they're sure to have gleaned too much plot detail from cultural osmosis to care. It's just like how I have never seen the original Star Wars movies but I don't really want to since I'm sure I won't be as into it as everyone else, since I already know who Luke's father is, and that Leia is his hot sister. Nonetheless, I must end by saying that I was quite proud of Rowling's accomplishments with this book, and I can't wait to read any supplemental material she writes when she realizes that her cash cow ain't goin' nowhere if she doesn't want it to.

updaaaate

So, after having come back to work directly after an exhausting cross-country long-weekend, I am now in full busy-planning mode for this weekend. It's my birfday on Sunday, and so I am incredibly busy getting everything figured out. Sorry I haven't devoted much time to the blog lately, but I thought I could get a little overview of things to come here:

-OUTFEST: I may be going to see the documentary The Believers at LA's Outfest this week - I'll let you know what I think, as it's made by an alumna of my school, and I'm always looking to give some support!

-COMIC CON 2007: That's right! I'm only going for Friday and Saturday, but it's going to be amazing. I've been waiting for this my whole life. As a first-timer (I went once as a little kid to meet Lt. Diana Troy from Star Trek: TNG, but that barely counts), I will not be dressing up or anything like that. But rest assured, I will be constantly taking photos, and jotting down notes about every event I attend!

-TRALIERS: I really want to get back into posting trailers! For now, just watch "Fido." It looks awesome.

-FALL SEASON ANTICIPATION: In which I judge upcoming TV shows without knowing anything about them. Expect it to turn into a profanity-laden rant about the goddamn Cavemen.

-HARRY POTTER: Okay, so I probably won't even see the fifth movie until it's on DVD, because I honestly don't care enough about the movies, and Daniel Radcliffe pisses me off. But I will be cloistering myself next weekend to read the final book in the series, and I can't wait to write out a retrospective about this series I began reading when I was 11 - the same age as Harry is in the first book! Sidenote: Emma Watson is a stone cold fox, and I have just got to put out there that - baby girl, if you are ever looking to crash with some cool people in LA...call me.

Yeah...there's other stuff, I'm sure, but I just wanted to check in. I saw Blades of Glory on the airplane, and it was a lot better than I thought it'd be. I was expecting Anchorman levels of stupidity, but Will Arnett, Amy Poehler, and Jenna Fischer kept me from being disappointed!

fish out of water

I first heard of Alice Sebold's novel The Lovely Bones when I was a high school freshman, and read an excerpt from it in a girls' magazine - I want to say it was "Girl's Life," but I can't be sure. I knew the premise was that narrator Susie had been raped and murdered, and that the bulk of the novel consisted of her watching her family cope from heaven. I certainly remember being fascinated by the concept of Susie watching her earthbound younger sister, who has had the opportunity to grow up, losing her virginity while at summer camp. "'I'm ready,' my sister said. At fourteen, my sister sailed away from me into a place I'd never been. In the walls of my sex there was horror and blood. In the walls of hers there were windows." (P. 125)

I loved the novel when I first read it, so much so that I convinced both of my parents to read it as well. Despite the fact that it was geared and marketed to young women, I believe both of them were as struck by it as I was. The relationships between Susie's parents and sister compete with the observations of the murdered girl to be the most captivating theme in the book.

Jeremy Smith's article on CHUD let me know that Peter Jackson will be turning the novel into a film. Those familiar with Jackson's work will know that he can make a movie that isn't a blockbuster heavy on special effects. So I'm willing to believe that Jackson can reign himself in and give us this story without layering it on too thick. But I'm really not sure about how this novel will translate to the screen. It's difficult for well-written narration to come across as too hokey or obvious in film, I think. Little Children did a good job of not going too heavy on the narration while keeping the storybook feeling of the novel. But even with that and the wonderful performances, there was still something off for me after having enjoyed the book.

This is a common problem for adaptations: that fans of the written narrative will always be let down by the film. The Harry Potter movies, for example, have always disappointed me, because there are too many omissions and changes. Then there's something like The Grapes of Wrath, where I could never expect a filmmaker to come close to the brilliance of Steinbeck's prose (I'm a little obsessed with Steinbeck, by the way), so the movie is still impressive on its own. But it pleases me to see Peter Jackson on the project, because The Lord of the Rings is the only novel whose film adaptations have exceeded my expectations. Even Gone With the Wind leaves me wishing that so many things hadn't been changed, and I love that movie.

However, there is a scene in the novel The Lovely Bones which I won't spoil, because I highly recommend reading it, which I just do not understand how it could be translated to the screen. It morphs narration with the visually and intellectually complex concept of corporeality, and I really don't know if they'll even keep it in the adaptation. Though I guess Jackson would be the man to try, so we'll see.

How do you feel about novel adaptations onscreen? Any outstanding ones you'd like to recommend?