However, how far are the media and corporations willing to go to continue making a profit off this series, despite it being finished? Turning the books into movies was a given. JKR's extension of books within the books ("Quidditch Through the Ages, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, Beedle the Bard) was predicted. Even board games, clothing, and other products like the production of actual chocolate frogs and BB's Ever Flavor Beans was to be expected.
However, the kicker for me is Universal's great undertaking to build "The Wizarding World of Harry Potter Theme Park". At a predicted cost of $265 million dollars, it is set to open June of 2010. The park is set to include the areas of Hogsmeade, Hogwarts Castle, and the Forbidden Forest, and it is to encompass various elements from books 1 through 7. JKR herself is even involved with the production (thank god).
So, is this too far? Should an actual, physical representation of the world I came to live in figuratively during my childhood be allowed to become materialized in front me, sans the main element that truly makes it in the books: magic? I feel it would cheapen these places you can never do justice in real life by building.
However, I stand before you as the biggest hypocrite ever. Does this theme park disgust me? Oh, most definitely. It's repulsing. Will I go when it opens? Oh, I've already got my ticket paid for, so watch out. In the end, I'm just as bad as corporations like WB I guess, because I fall right into that trap where I'm willing to shill out good money to see something like this.
And here may be the best thing yet:
Here is a link to concept art of what the park would look like
Pretty much the shit, no?
And Here is an example of what Warner Bros actually has produced
Fail.
So what are everyone else's thoughts on this?
I agree...I hope this doesn't sound like a repeat of all you said. Its all driven by money. A book doesn't fly off the shelves, production stops. A book causes a decade long phenomena, that we have yet to see the end of, and it gets made into movies and what ever else will sell. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. However,usually with fantasy, it is hard to recreate in the real world what books allow us to imagine, especially without a green screen and sound effects. The chocolate frogs are just chocolate and have no spell cast on them to animate them. The robes feel more like plastic than cloth and no sparks light up the end of a wand when it is waved. All the same people are delighted to see half a cart in the wall at platform 9 3/4 at King's Cross. As much as we know it is just fantasy, we want it to be real, so we try to recreate it. Make a theme park. A million HP fans, including myself, will go to ooh and ahh at this "replica" of Harry's world. Most will rave about how cool the rides are and how good the food is at Hogsmeade. But when the day is over there is only plastic snow and a cheesy gift shop at the end of the ride. A cheap looking substitute for the richness of the words of a great author and one's own imagination.
ReplyDeleteI personally think the themepark will be a huge success. What other series of books are worldwide known? I can't think of any except the Harry Potter series. While I don't read much of it, I would not mind going to the place.
ReplyDeleteOh, I'm definitely not denying that this park will makes loads of money. I mean, that's why it was built after all. Not really to try to recreate such a wonderful place for all us Harry fans, but instead as an easy way to gain a fast profit. Just like everything else at Universal, it will be way overpriced.
ReplyDeleteThis is partially another problem I have with the park. Like you pointed out, these books are a worldwide success. That means children everywhere will be clamoring to come here. However, obviously not all will be able to afford the luxury of going. Which, this is just the way the world works, but still, that's lame that corporations would do this.
Well in a way your childhood fantasy has already been a bit tainted by the movie. Before everyone crucifies me for speaking ill of the movie; don't get me wrong I love the movies. However I believe that everyone can agree that they still are nothing compared to the books! Either way though, the movies took away a bit of your fantasy, and turned it in to some what of a reality. This theme park makes the fantasy even more tangible; which is something I love. The idea of actually entering a world from one of my favorite books is somewhat enchanting.
ReplyDeletePut it this way, I havent been to Disneyland since I was seven (and it rained the whole time), but you better believe that as soon as that themepark opens, I will be there.
I think the theme park is a better idea than the rumors that were once flying around about a musical (erk!). But that's just me. I am rather excited about the park as well, but at the same time I also agree that it is all about money. That is obvious.
ReplyDeleteBut like Sara said (the other Sara, haha), my mentality of the world and characters has already been decided for me by the movies. I was reading the books long before the first movie came out, yet now I find it hard to reread the books without seeing Dan Radcliffe kill what looks more like a giant, green eel more than a basilisk. Still, I will always be first in line at the theater, right now wondering how they'll portray the ending of the 6th book in the upcoming movie.
It comes down to this: the books require our imagination; then we thirst for movies which require our eyes; now, we will long for our entire being to be immersed in a world that we have been reading about since the first book was published in the US in 1998. It's been over a decade....they were running out of appealing options. What is left? A themepark.
"It is clear that the books will forever remain well-read, by this generation and many to come." How do you know this?
ReplyDelete"How far are the media and corporations willing to go to continue making a profit off this series, despite it being finished? ... That's lame that corporations would do this." Given that no one has made more money off the series than J.K. Rowling, who has to approve everything in exchange for a hefty cut of the profits, isn't she more to blame than "the media and corporations" -- assuming you're looking to blame somebody for continuing to provide product to the fans?
"Should an actual, physical representation of the world I came to live in figuratively during my childhood be allowed to become materialized in front [of] me, sans the main element that truly makes it in the books: magic?" Does Disney World cheapen Disney movies? Does Universal Studios Orlando cheapen "Psycho"?
"Usually with fantasy, it is hard to recreate in the real world what books allow us to imagine, especially without a green screen and sound effects." Does animation do a better job?
"What other series of books are worldwide known? I can't think of any except the Harry Potter series." Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" trilogy? Pratchett's Discworld series? L. Frank Baum's Oz books?
I do think Andy's questions bring up a very good point - what do we really *know*? There is certainly a consumer impulse Universal is feeding here (that is, after all, how you keep a fandom breathing), but the enduring cultural currency of the HP series is still up for question.
ReplyDeleteThough HP is one of the only big cultural "touchstones" to come out in my (and others') later years, such things frequently last little more than a generation. After all, can anyone in the class remember, say, Love Story (which was one of the "Titantic"s of its time)?
"It is clear that the books will forever remain well-read, by this generation and many to come." How do you know this?
ReplyDelete...I truly believe these books are the next great "Disney classics", if you will. Children now and their parents alike all know the tale of Cinderella, they both all know the songs from the Lion King, they both know the fate of the Little Mermaid. I don't "know" this per say, but if many people have the mindset that I do, and i know they do, people like me will read Harry Potter to their children. It's kind of a cycle that fans like me now are expected to share with future generations. I really do think it is foolish to assume that these books will just vanish in popularity years from now. Their effects on the world of literature are just too vast.
"How far are the media and corporations willing to go to continue making a profit off this series, despite it being finished? ... That's lame that corporations would do this." Given that no one has made more money off the series than J.K. Rowling, who has to approve everything in exchange for a hefty cut of the profits, isn't she more to blame than "the media and corporations" -- assuming you're looking to blame somebody for continuing to provide product to the fans?
...I'm not looking to blame somebody necessarily. I just feel that there are better routes to provide product to the fans, if product even needs to be provided at this point. I am perfectly content with this ending at the books and the movies. I don't need any "product" to continue being a fan of Harry Potter. And I think that something to this degree, maybe not a theme park, but as Sara said, it could have been a musical, would have happened regardless of JKR's input. People could have bought the complete rights from her and given her no say so. I think, on her part, that it is a good idea for her to work with this project so Warner Brothers doesn't completely screw it over. Either way, she would make money by selling the rights or stay on and be involved in the projects at hand herself. I think she made the right choice.
"Should an actual, physical representation of the world I came to live in figuratively during my childhood be allowed to become materialized in front [of] me, sans the main element that truly makes it in the books: magic?" Does Disney World cheapen Disney movies? Does Universal Studios Orlando cheapen "Psycho"?
...Disney World does not cheapen the movies. But as I am biased more towards liking Harry Potter; it really is more of a personal cheapening of sorts. I mean, I didn't grow up loving and wanting to be Cinderella or Snow White, so having them materialized in front of me is no big deal, i could care less if they got all the details wrong. Harry Potter on the other hand, you get it right or you don't do it at all. My extreme bias, haha.
"Usually with fantasy, it is hard to recreate in the real world what books allow us to imagine, especially without a green screen and sound effects." Does animation do a better job?
...Well no, but I never said it did.
"Usually with fantasy, it is hard to recreate in the real world what books allow us to imagine, especially without a green screen and sound effects." Does animation do a better job?
ReplyDeleteNo, of course not. I was just suggesting a hierarchy of realism - that the world of Harry Potter is most realistically created within one's imagination. Secondly, in pictorial and film representations, with new physical representations/attractions trailing at the end. This isn't to degrade the merit or enjoyment that each avenue has.
Nothing, absolutely nothing compares to how you percieve a world in a book. I have been a fan of Harry Potter since the beginning and nothing compares that the world that I imagined in my mind when I would read the books over and over before the movies. I would have to agree with Sara Smith and say that the movies do alter that ultimate world that you imagine in your mind, but you still have that.
ReplyDeleteEvery time a new movie comes out I will reread that book just before the release, because we all know that the movies contain plot holes/alterations, a lack of Dobby in every other movie, and many other things. My boyfriend thinks I'm being too critical, but I think it's what any fan would do. I would say this goes for almost all book to movie situations (I'm not sure about LOTR, never read the books).
As for the theme park, I will be there. Like we were talking about in class, the characters grew up with you and I feel very attached to that ( I know that must sound obsessive). I just hope that building they made will look just a tad bit better in the "Hogmeade" environment.
Okay, well I obviously waited too long to jump in on this, but I'll put in my two cents anyway.
ReplyDeleteI will be there for opening day of the theme park, no joke. I know it's about money and whatnot, but I really don't care. Harry Potter is/has been a huge part of my life and I will go ahead and support it.
I agree with Sara though, about the movies. I mean, I love them, but at the same time I hate them because a)they are not as good as the books - no where near it and b) they messed with my perceptions of how things were and c) I cannot STAND it when people watch the movies but don't read the books. It kills me. But I watch them anyway because I just love Harry so much.
After reading Harry, A History, I have come to understand a lot more about just how manipulated the release of the books was and what lengths were gone to to make the most money for the books as humanly possible. I guess I could be upset about it, but I'm really not. J.K. Rowling did something truly phenomenal, and she deserves every penny she gets. Besides, everything in today's world is about money. EVERYTHING. So I'm not upset.
Besides, anything to perpetuate the magic of Harry Potter to future generations works for me.