Alexander Payne

24 November 2014

English 149

Alan Liu

Research Report for Book to Film Franchise Project

This article was written by an individual that did not grow up reading the Harry Potter novels. For that reason their only source of knowledge on Harry Potter comes from the film. They chose to purposefully ignore the other medium thereby limiting their resources and experience of the Harry Potter world. In their article they carry a negative viewpoint of the Harry Potter film. This viewpoint usually isn’t carried by other movie goers. Their skewed viewpoint takes way by stating that the Harry Potter film brings nothing positive to children and was made by adults that hate children.

There are times where people are inclined to stick to one medium. This could be because of preference, or a lack of ability to obtain the experience of the other medium. However in these modern times mediums are becoming more accessible to the majority of populations, more so in America than anywhere. For example, in America people have the opportunity to purchase the Harry Potter novels and experience the cinemas. For that reason it was clear the writer for Pro Youth didn’t read “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone” because of their own personal choice.

“What’s Wrong with the Harry Potter Movie” article states in the very beginning that the writer did not bother reading the novels. So their opinion is completely based on their own perspective and experience through the cinema. “What’s Wrong with the Harry Potter Movie” is from the perspectives of an outlier, or extreme source. This outlier can offer an outside perspective for any research done in audience reactions to the movies. The norm is that people read Harry Potter, watch Harry Potter, and love it. Pro Youth’s writer however, hates Harry Potter.

Interestingly enough the writer accredits most of the problems with Harry Potter’s themes to Hollywood instead of the actual writer, J.K. Rowling. They felt that the movies didn’t offer anything positive for children. The writer claims that the films encourage poor treatment of children as well as abuse. This viewpoint makes for an interesting addition to the team project on Books to Film Franchise. What makes this viewpoint of use is that one could question if their perspective could have been changed by advertising.

The writer feels the movies don’t offer anything positive to children. Except he does talk about how “great special effects” is becoming a norm in cinema. They are also aware that movies today can cost a lot of money, especially for children, and does not appreciate that. Since they did not read the book they are unaware that the family Harry lives with is not an adoptive family. If they were to have read the book they would know that the family he lives with is actually his aunt and uncle. Also the “brother” he uses magic on is actually his muggle cousin. So it is not s much the story is promoting the abuse of children and the adoption process. Rather the films and book are simply showing these are terrible relatives.

The writer believes that Hollywood is saying it is alright to mistreat and hurt children. When in actuality this film is a novel adaptation. Immediately after he states what’s wrong with the film the writer announces that they have not read the novel. The writer goes on to inform they will be reserving their critical comments only for the film. Next they argue that Harry Potter is a powerless protagonist. This argument is then defended by the claim that every victory is handed to Harry and nothing is earned by hard work. Yet this writer does not know the main villain is Voldemort or that Voldemort is being assisted by professor Quirrell. They either don’t include this information because they were unaware or didn't bother too.

Makes a valid point that Harry uses a magical power he did not know he had. States that this is an ageist cliché: When older heroes in movies get to defeat enemies through use of skill and wisdom. Yet young heroes are helpless and only luck can assist them in victory. They make the astonishingly valid point that children reading this can relate to the empowerment of luck. This is useful information to Book to Film Franchise project because it coincides with the argument that Harry Potter is popular because of relatability.

The writer then twists one of the most important points of the novels and puts a negative spin on it. They were correct when saying his fate was determined by the actions of his parents. However they then claim the message is if your parents don’t love you, you can never become anything in life. You will never succeed or reach a status of importance. When in actuality the message is that the power of love is strong enough that it can shift the outcome of the future.

The final example the writer uses in their argument over how adults just hand things to Harry is actually valid. Towards the end of the film Dumbledore gives Gryffindor a rather large number of points for reasons he sees fitting. In a way it kind of disregards all the hard work the other classes have put into during the school year. This is a reflection of how it’s not about what the children do to impress their peers but rather win over the adult authority figures. The writer for pro youth compares this to the act of throwing scraps of food to a dog. But this is not the tone or expression that the filmmakers planned to compose.

However the attitudes the children express are very real and true to the image that coming in first is something to be proud about and boast. While on the other hand losing is nothing to be cheerful about. This is a principle especially held true in America. Information such as this can also be useful to the Book to Film Franchise project. Harry Potter is a franchise Americans love, and the reason we believe this to be so is relatability. By having the ideals of Americans Harry Potter becomes more relatable and therefore a more likable character.

“Genre in the Mainstream: The Literary Merits of Potter.” Tor.com. Science Fiction, n.d. Web. 21 Jun. 2011.

“Harry’r World: An Exploration of J.K. Rowling’s Social and Political Agenda in the Harry Potter Series.” Uwlax. UW-L Journal, 2007. Web. n.d.

“What’s Wrong with the Harry Potter Movie.” proyouthpages. Art and Culture, n.d. Web. 2002.

“You can’t be serious about Harry Potter!” telegraph. The Telegraph, n.d. Web. 18 May. 2012.