![]() ![]() This “Harry Potter” is therefore a product more than a film or, as the text would have it, a Voldemort required to leech off another being in order to stay alive. ![]() in making all the right decisions, from keeping it “British” to realizing that a high-powered and personal filmmaker (such as Steven Spielberg or Terry Gilliam, both of whom were up for the job) was not only unnecessary but actually undesirable, given that textual alterations and idiosyncratic flights of fancy would have been distracting at best and irritating at worst for the intended audience. Then as now, the result would seem to be exactly what the eager public is waiting for.įrom the point of view of protecting and thus maximizing the franchise, one must acknowledge the smarts of producer David Heyman and Warner Bros. In both cases, everyone had an opinion about the casting, which ultimately turned out brilliantly the authors (both female, coincidentally) desired a fidelity to the text, which was honored directors were hired who could be counted upon to obediently serve the material vast sums were spent to create the physical worlds of the novels, and the producers bucked conventional thinking about running time to include all the necessary incidents. ![]() In historical terms, the most surprising but apt comparison to be drawn is with “Gone With the Wind,” another literary sensation that spawned a film version that had to meet similarly demanding public expectations. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |