Showing posts with label Greyback. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Greyback. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 1, 2019

Not So Trivial Flaws

Trivial Pursuit, Harry Potter edition.

Very excited to get this as a gift from a sibling and her family for Christmas this year. To be honest, I had never even heard of it but was delighted when it showed up under the tree.

"Please please please," I pleaded as I opened the box for the first time. "Let this game focus on pure Harry Potter..."

Trivial Pursuit, for those of you who don't know, was created in Canada I believe way back in the 1980s and was an instant hit, first in its home country and then around the world. After the original edition, with its six original categories of questions (if I remember correctly, Geography, Science and Nature, Arts and Literature, History, Sports and Leisure and finally Entertainment), there followed the Silver Screen edition (which focused on movies exclusively), the All-Star Sports Edition (which is self-explanatory) and then the Genus II edition, which returned to the original six categories. At some point in there, the original creator of Trivial Pursuit sold the game to a major American producer.

From there, a series of special Trivial Pursuit games were released, one for every major fad that came down the pipe. Despite this serious dilution of its core base, Trivial Pursuit continued to thrive.

It's a story that sounds kind of familiar to Harry Potter fans, isn't it? Humble beginnings, surprising success, a sell-out to a U.S. conglomerate and a rapid proliferation of spin-offs that move the "franchise" into a deeper and deeper dive for profit and further away from its roots.

Although the Trivial Pursuit, Harry Potter edition, has many merits -- it focuses on the original seven, true Potter stories and ignores the inspired mess of Hollywood insipidness and merchandising frenzy that followed -- it also suffers from two flaws:

  1. It prefers the American versions of the original stories over the British versions; and
  2. It prioritizes the events of the films over the events of the novels.
The first flaw is perhaps understandable -- an American game maker is attempting to appeal to an American audience and so uses "The Sorcerer's Stone" etc., the name familiar to its audience.

The second flaw is inexcusable. The books are Harry Potter -- the films are merely adaptations of Rowling's novels (and significantly problematic adaptations at that).

So when you face a question in the Trivial Pursuit, Harry Potter edition, like, "Who burned down the Weasley's home?", you know the correct answer is "no one" because, well, the Weasley's home was never burnt to the ground in the novels.

In the films, of course, Bellatrix Lestrange and Fenrir Greyback do set fire to the Burrow.

And when you get a question like "What Muggle game appears in the background of Mr. Weasley's workshop?", you know that there is no answer because Rowling never describes the "workshop" in such detail. Sure, in the film, you see that there is a pinball machine back there but that is merely a choice made by a set decorator, not a creative decision of the creator of Harry Potter.

The least the game designers could have done was to introduce each question with a qualifier -- "In the film version" and "In the original novels" -- to point out the difference.

Of course, I would love to have a TP game that focuses on the books alone. Or even one that has a separate category for the films: "Film Facts" or "Film Adaptations" or some such. But to have an HP TP game that actually treats the books like they don't matter?

Not acceptable. Not even remotely acceptable. But typical of the trajectory both TP and HP have followed since their humble but outrageously creative beginnings. TP and HP have both been sold out and are being exploited by soulless US conglomerates who care more about profit than art, generating cash flow than creating magic.

Sunday, September 11, 2016

The Burrow burnt; the Burrow rebuilt

So I'm watching the last three Harry Potter films... just because. I don't particularly like them but, once in a while, I feel the need to see them again. Especially when I am re-reading the novels.

As I read The Half-Blood Prince (in French), I thought I'd throw in the Blu Ray of the movie version, which led to where I am now, with The Deathly Hallows, Part I, in the Blu Ray player, watching the opening scenes.

And it occurs to me, as it has several times before, to ask the question: if the film-makers decided to take the creative liberty in the sixth movie of introducing an all new scene in which Bellatrix, Greyback and several other Death Eaters attack and finally burn the Burrow to the ground, why is that particular domicile back at the start of the seventh film, rebuilt exactly as it was?

The Burrow was always, in novels and films, a ramshackle collection of rooms, pieced together over years and years, making no sense, comfortable almost in spite of itself. In the books, it never burned so there was no reason for Mr. and Mrs. Weasley to rebuild it into a more practical, more comfortable structure.

In the film, however, we see the Burrow completely engulfed in flames and we get a close up of Molly Weasley, standing by, helpless, as it burns to ashes.

By the time the seventh film starts, however, the Burrow is back in one piece. Exactly the same ramshackle, ill-designed piece that burned only a few months before. Why not improve it? Why not make it a more sturdy structure, bigger, better designed,with better flow, better light, better everything?

Sure, you can tell me that the Weasley's made the decision to rebuild the Burrow exactly as it was before out of a sense of history, of sentiment, of not wanting to lose their "home". But it makes no sense to me.

Is it possible the film-makers simply forgot that they burned it to the ground????

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Teddy Lupin: Harry Potter, the Next Generation?

How did I not recognise this? It's sitting there, staring me in the face! Once you see it, it is so obvious you're amazed you didn't notice it as soon as you read the seventh book.

Teddy Lupin is the next generation of the Harry Potter character.

Orphaned in the final battle against the Death Eaters, son of two of Voldemort's staunchest opponents, left to fend for himself in the magical world. With Harry Potter as his god father.

I have to credit Emily and Clare for opening my eyes to this fact this past Christmas. They pointed it out as we watched the extras to The Deathly Hallows, Part 2.

It's brilliant. And it speaks so much to how J.K. Rowling imagined her magical world continuing to develop, even after the end of Voldemort.

If the death of the Dark Lord represents the final defeat of the "pure blood" movement, then it also represents the beginning of the fight against other forms of oppression in the magical world, including the oppression of Goblins, House Elves, Centaurs and, yes, Werewolves.

Teddy Lupin represents that future.

It's interesting to note that there are at least three examples in the Harry Potter novels where Werewolves are allowed to join wizarding communities:
- Remus Lupin is, of course, the most famous example, welcomed by Albus Dumbledore to Hogwarts as a student and, later, as a teacher, befriended by James, Sirius and Peter while at school, a respected member of the Order of the Phoenix in both wars against darkness;
- Voldemort and his Death Eaters, the champions of the pure blood cause, include Fenrir Greyback in their army, although it is clear from the way Greyback is treated by Bellatrix at Malfoy Manor that the Werewolf is not seen as an equal; and
- I believe that there was a Werewolf guest at one of Slughorn's parties: Sanguini, wasn't it? Sorry, I don't have access to my books right now and the internet is not helpful on this score.

I think it would be very interesting if someone were to write a fairly serious novel following Teddy Lupin and the challenges he faces growing up in a society that is still not particularly tolerant of his racial background. It could be a real metaphor for the modes of oppression people currently face in our own society.

And, of course, in writing that book, the author could also have some fun with the idea that Teddy is really Harry, the next generation.