Philosopher's Stone vs. Azkaban (1 Viewer)

[PhoenixBurd]

Hey guys, I'm currently undertaking my Honours year in film studies and thought that it would be great to get some opinions from other people.

Very very basically, I am contrasting two of the Harry Potter films: HP and the Philosopher's Stone, dir. Christopher Columbus, with HP and the Prisoner of Azkaban, dir. Alfonso Cuaron.

My focus is on the concept of embodied affect. In other words, the ways in which films place you in and around a moment of experience/visual curiosity, unique to cinema. One of the best contemporary examples I have is the plastic bag scene in American Beauty. You know it. I know that some people don't take it seriously, but it is indeed a very affective scene. The cinematic techniques all work together with such rhythm that the movements of the plastic bag move through you, and you're experiencing embodied affect. I won't try and describe this any further, but you get the general understanding...

In my opinion, I feel that Cuaron works with space so much more effectively in PoA, example: how he portrays Hagrid's Hut. Showing it's context within the rest of Hogwarts vs. Columbus, who only uses an establishing shot of the hut, and then uses mostly close-ups of the characters, with a focus on the narrative components, over the 'feel' of the world. Alfonso places you into the world of Hogwarts in a n abstract way very unlike Columbus, by using space. (I realise this is example is not fully developed, but it gives you the general idea.)

So what I'd like to ask, is how you would contrast the two films. Thinking about what things do you feel were successful in each film? Would you agree that Cuaron's film has more affective qualities than Columbus' film? How does each film make you feel? Would you say that Columbus' focus is the translation of narrative, and maintaining fidelity with the books?... lots to think about!

I would love to hear your thoughts! If you're a Harry Potter fan or not, all opinions are relevant!

 

[ilikebeeef]

All I remember is that Harry and Co. acted and looked so childish in the first movie. Then they became more "mature".

 

[HalcyonSky]

are you certain this is an honours thesis and not year 10 english?

 

[postnatal]

lol what a waste of an entire year

 

[shuttle_bus5]

are you certain this is an honours thesis and not year 10 english?

This.

My year 10 essays sounded better.

 

[Lauchlan]

Wow, nice. I understand what your saying, but you have to take into account the context of the times that led to the different films. In a sense the first and second are completely different films to the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7ths... because of different technology, actors and ideas. I would agree on the whole space thing to an extent, but take into account what the movies were trying to portray - two different harry potter years with very different 'feels' about them. I wouldn't necessarily say one actor is doing something better, or more effectively.

A good but hard choice here! Well done so far.

 

[kaz1]

I like the first and second. I don't like the dark tone of the following films, it makes it more difficult to watch a camrip.

 

[Cinnamonster]

Prisoner of Azkaban was better.
The Goblet of Fire was the best though (it wins purely because of the graveyard scene at the end).

 

[123 B A N G]

I really found the PoA much more engaging the darker tones and the sets were funnily enough stranger and more outlandish but more real. Though you have to look at it in the context of the books and the tone that each of them set. The first book was lighter and childish because the audience was young the books got darker and more complex and drew deeper feeling from the reader because they had grown up too.

 

[Failure_123]

HSC 2003 LOL? you're like 25 years old and wanting answers from a bunch of teenagers ahahaha. You're old enough to be their teacher...

 

[Failure_123]

Ohh sorry didn't see the thread about harry potter. You've come to the right place.

 

[Dragonmaster262]

Starting from Azkaban a lot of plot elements were left out and that made the following films very confusing.

 

[chrisnumber1]

lol what a waste of an entire year

he is studying film studies.....what a waste of a whole degree

 

[zaqwerty]

are you certain this is an honours thesis and not year 10 english?

If she really delved into it I'm sure you would see the distinction between Year 10 English and an Honours Thesis

 

[zaqwerty]

he is studying film studies.....what a waste of a whole degree

And what would qualify to you as a "worthy" degree..?

 

[kaz1]

I really found the PoA much more engaging the darker tones and the sets were funnily enough stranger and more outlandish but more real. Though you have to look at it in the context of the books and the tone that each of them set. The first book was lighter and childish because the audience was young the books got darker and more complex and drew deeper feeling from the reader because they had grown up too.

Why would the audience change as the series progresses? Kiddies watch the first film they would want to watch the following films.

 

[SpoonSamba]

You've chose the 2 best films of the series so far I think. They're both the most wholesome and work best as indivdual works compared to the others which all suck shit.

I'd argue they bothe createa space very different to each other. The first film is inocent when harry walks in to t he grat hall the tones are all warm the music is festive the candles r warm n the whoel place glows and is inviting which is what its meant to be.

3rd one is much darker the sky is grey thought out the whole film, and I love how they have the choir holding toads singing 'double double toil and trouble', its so good but it alludes to darker magic like that teh witches perform in macbeth so yeah.

first one aims to achieve hogwarts is wholesom. 3rd is about fear, revenge and isolation i think they both effectively capture their themes in different ways.

 

[lolman12567]

i enjoy the 3rd book alot but the movie is shit. the rest of the movies are as good as they can be. (the books get progressively better)

 

[PhoenixBurd]

are you certain this is an honours thesis and not year 10 english?

As I said when explaining my thesis, I was providing a "very very basic" description. The contrast between the two Harry Potter films are only one element of my whole thesis. The films each provide solid examples on my arguments on the importance of embodied affect. Obviously there is so much more involved than how each film makes you 'feel'; I was simply asking for some genral opinions on the films. My thesis is about affect theory, cultural studies and research and how we process images/films somatically and semantically. With respect, I go far beyond the levels and processes of a year ten english essay, two fold.

 

[PhoenixBurd]

lol what a waste of an entire year

As for this being a waste of a year, I would respectfully disagree. Honours year provides an opportunity to experience high levels of research practices, which go far beyond the levels of most undergrad degrees in the Humanities, and most definitely any level of high school research. Where do you think scholarly journal articles and published books generally originate from? Academics go through Honours and PHD years so that they can contribute to the body of academic knowledge. The exact same knowledge which you will use in your own studies. Any work you undertake during your year as a year ten high school student, does not in any way compare to an Honours thesis. You simply cannot in any way, supply the same amount of research and enlightenment in 2,000 words, compared to 15,000 words.