Saw the new Harry Potter. I suspect it wasn’t bad, but I didn’t get it. It didn’t answer the question I’ve been asking since Fiennes turned up in the last one: What happened to the Voldemort guy’s nose?
Then there are the other questions. Did he have one to begin with? Is this the cause of his nastiness: proboscis envy? Apart from his meanness towards the kid, what forms does this nastiness take? Did Harry’s dead parents have something to do with the loss of the nose? What does he have against Harry anyway, didn’t he approve of the nude scenes in Equus? Why can’t Voldemort’s name be mentioned when everyone knows what it is, even the poor schmucks in the audience who haven’t read the books? Why can’t Voldemort’s name be mentioned without one’s voice dropping an octave and an eyebrow rising significantly? And what is that girl’s problem, is she attempting semaphore with her eyebrows? So what if the noseless one wins, how bad can it get? How will it affect the lives of the ordinary powerless mortals?
And there’s the big question, the one the entire Potter movie series has been pretending not to hear: What exactly is at stake here? As long as it remains unanswered, the movies will have as much sense of urgency and emotional impact as a power struggle in a boarding school drama guild.
A film adaptation should be able to stand alone, independent of its source, and it must be coherent even to those who have not read the book. At least with the Lord of the Rings movies, you need not have read Tolkien to know why Sauron looked like a glowing vagina.