movie

Accio Analysis! Harry Potter and My Thoughts on the Series

I’ve read all the books, seen all the movies (except for Deathly Hallows Part 1), and have learned more about the series online. However, I am not like many other Harry Potter fans for this reason: I like the movies more than the books. Why? Here are two reasons (feel free to disagree with me):

1: I find the characters and situations to be more believable in the movies than the books. There are so many instances where I was glad something from the books that I didn’t find credible were either cut out of the films or changed into being more believable, with the exceptions of bigger concepts, like no one reporting the Dursleys to social services or how owls know how to deliver letters to the right people. Here are a couple of examples of scenes I was glad were cut out of the movies:

-In Prisoner of Azkaban, there is one scene where Harry, Ron, and Hermione are at Hagrid’s hut. At first Hagrid thanks them, but then he suddenly explodes at them (“WHAT DO YOU THINK YOU’RE DOING, EH?”-written by J.K. Rowling). Unless Hagrid has some mysterious mood-swing disorder (which I’m sure he doesn’t), there is no way he would erupt out of anger from calmness. It just doesn’t feel believable.

-In Order of the Phoenix, when Harry punches Draco, he not only gets detention from McGonnagall, but Umbridge adds a life-long ban from Quiddich because of that. But I don’t think any instructor, even someone as horrible as Umbridge, would hand out such a severe punishment for an offense not harsh enough for that. Harry would have been banned from Quiddich for life if he were a professional Quiddich player and did something much worse over and over again. But for punching another student, he would have been, at most banned from the Hogwarts Quiddich team for the rest of his fifth year, maybe until after he graduated.

And here are a couple examples I was happy that the movie makers changed:

-In the Sorcerer’s Stone When Hagrid first meets Harry after ten years, he says something about tea (I don’t remember off the top of my head), but it didn’t sound natural. In the film, he actually apologized, and I liked that more.

-In the Goblet of Fire, when the champions are being selected, there were some unnecessary reactions. One was how some Beaubaxton students cried from not being selected. And the other was Ron shouting, “No!” when Cedric was selected the Hogwarts champion. I get that the movies need to cut out a lot of content (I’m also aware the Book 4 was originally going to be two movies, like Book 7), but I still liked this better than in the book.

2. I like how the characters are better at controlling their emotions in the films than in the novels.

-While everyone says Book Ginny is better than movie Ginny is better, I can see the reasons why… except in Book 1. Ginny was too immature for her age. If I had been old enough to read Sorcerer’s Stone before Chamber of Secrets had been released, I would have thought Ginny was 5 or 6 at most. No way would I have thought she was 10. I’m glad the movie makers matured her.

-In the Order of the Phoenix book, Sirius was not as friendly as in the movie. He had bad tempers, which didn’t really happen in the film. That was why I found movie Sirius more likable than book Sirius.

That being said…

-This may be the opposite that everyone complains about. In the Goblet of Fire book, after Harry is selected champion, Dumbledore asks calmly, “Did you put you name in the goblet of fire?” While in the movie, it’s aggressively. I laugh at that, because I thought the way it was done in the film was fine. Even though I discovered that it wasn’t like Dumbledore to talk like that, I still find it humorous.

And now here are some unanswered questions that have been wandering in my mind?

  1. What would have happened if someone reported the Dursleys to social services and the social services people took Harry away and placed him in foster care?

I find it hard to believe, even for a child who grew up in the 80’s, that nobody had been horrified by how the Dursleys have treated Harry and have done anything about it. Did the neighbors not ever have visitors who were new to Privet Drive? Or new residents moving there? I get that this is fiction. I also know that the wizarding world forces Harry to stay with his blood-relatives for protection, even though they treat him horribly. But I still find it odd that no outsider had been shocked and reported the Dursleys. I’m pretty sure in real life, long before Harry turned 11, somebody would have reported the Dursleys to Britain’s child protective services equivalent, and by the second chapter on Sorcerer’s Stone, Harry would have already been living in foster care for a while, with more responsible and legitimate foster parents. Maybe they would have been strict and/or overprotective with lots of unfair rules (maybe they would’ve been against the idea of Harry going off to Hogwarts), but they wouldn’t have been nearly as bad as the Dursleys.

2. What would the magical world have done if someone had reported the Dursleys to social services and Harry was taken away and placed in a foster home (and Harry wasn’t involved in any of those decisions)?

This will probably never be answered. But I still wonder what the ministry of magic would have done. Would they have been able to move the protection to the foster home? Would they have asked social services to take Harry back to the Dursleys? Would they have done nothing? Who knows?

That’s really it. Regardless of all these things, I still enjoy the series and learning more about it.

TV show

Fairly Odd Parents Conspiracy Theory-Is Everyone as Happy as the US?

The Fairly Odd Parents was, perhaps, my favorite childhood cartoon growing. I watched from when it first came out in 2001, at the age of 7, up until right after turning 13, when I lost interest. Despite loving it when I was a kid, it’s not really an easy watch for me anymore.

Anyway, one thing I noticed about the show’s content in recent years has wandered my mind for a while. And that is… is everyone in the FOP universe as happy as the US? And by that, I mean both economically and culturally.

Now I won’t go into politics, obviously. In fact, everything I mention will only be about the world in the FOP universe, not ours. So here are some hints to my conspiracy theory.

Warning: There will be spoilers!

1: Timmy’s Friend, Chester shouting, “I’m the most miserable kid in the world!” in the special, “Fairy Idol”-This is perhaps the biggest clue. What I remember is that his dad became famous and he knew how to play the banjo. But in real life, that would have made him considered to be one of the HAPPIEST kids in the world. If you think about it, Chester was NOT as poor (or unlucky) as some people living in some countries where they constantly have to worry about survival and struggle to get their basic needs. There was also no war going on in Dimsdale, another instance where Chester would be a LOT more miserable as his safety would most likely have been jeopardized. The same would apply if he lived in a society where the government controlled and restricted things for their citizens (such as travel and Internet). And the last thing is that he was in pretty good health as he hadn’t any diseases or injuries.

2: The names on the unwished wish lockers in the unwished wish episode (I can’t remember the name of that episode)-I recall famous names like Walt Disney and Tina Turner. While I can’t remember all of them, I do acknowledge that those people were all living like Timmy-not that they necessarily had evil babysitters or caregivers, but that they had every point I mentioned in the first hint about (wealth status, safety status, government rule status, and health status).

3: Every child who has or had fairy godparents-From Timmy Turner to Remy Buxeplemy, and many more, they also have have what I listed above. So if you think about it, you should notice what they have or had in common.

Conclusion:

If the FOP universe were like ours, all the fairies would be assigned to kids who are in stronger need than those like Timmy or Chester. Most would be helping kids living in extreme poverty, war, certain controlling government systems (like fascist or communist), with severe diseases or injuries that would last them for a really long time. So fewer children living in a place like the US would have fairies, and they would be in much more critical and serious conditions than what Timmy lives through in the series. That means, unfortunately for him, he wouldn’t have or need Cosmo and Wanda. Having a nasty babysitter wouldn’t really be enough.

So with all this hints,… do you think the Fairly Odd Parents Universe is happy than our universe in real life?