Fatastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindlewald - Prerelease Thread

Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by JD, Nov 17, 2017.

  1. Shamrock Holmes

    Shamrock Holmes Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    I meant no offense and if I have I apologise.

    The simple answer is there is no official position that it isn't.

    Can you clarify why you believe that they aren't? The only difference I can think of between the novels and the screenplay is formatting, which doesn't seem to be a good reason to assume otherwise to me.
     
  2. Allyn Gibson

    Allyn Gibson Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2000
    Location:
    South Pennsyltucky
    The only thing that's canon is "My Immortal." Everything else is not. :)

    Seriously, though, I'm not personally aware of any "statement of canon." My hunch, for what it's worth, is that Rowling doesn't even conceive of the Harry Potter universe in that way, given her habit of making statements about the universe (like the revelation that Dumbledore was gay) that exist outside of the books and the films but have an effect on the way the books are read, as well as Pottermore's ethos of essentially treating everything as valid. At the same time, Rowling's comments on the casting of Hermione in The Cursed Child suggests that the movies' interpretation of the books is just that, an interpretation. (But, again, those comments don't automatically mean that Hermione is canonically black. She said she had never said, which means that The Cursed Child, as performed, it itself simply another interpretation. I'm not sure how that relates back to the Fantastic Beasts series of films, which exist as films first and foremost, which don't interpret pre-existing material.

    Maybe, like Doctor Who, Harry Potter has no canon. Or at least, not one in the Star Trek sense. Your question may not have an answer.
     
    Brefugee likes this.
  3. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    Aren't what? My question is about a choice between two possibilities -- either the movies are in the book canon or they're in the film canon. Or the third possibility that maybe they're supposed to be canonical to both, despite the variations between the two. The whole reason I'm asking is that I don't know what the answer is. I don't have a preconceived belief, I just have a question.


    Of course there are differences. It's impossible to adapt a work from one medium to another without making changes. There are whole huge swaths of story in the books that are not included in the movies, whole characters and subplots that are missing, scenes that are altered or combined or invented wholesale. There are differences of interpretation to make the films more visual. For instance, one of my least favorite things about the first movie was that it took the mysterious, inexplicably shifting architecture of Hogwarts -- where a path that took you one place on one day would take you someplace entirely different the next, for reasons that were unseen and unknowable, as if the school were dimensionally transcendental or reality itself were being rewritten -- and replaced them with the boringly prosaic gimmick of staircases visibly pivoting around while the students stood on them.

    So it's a given that any adaptation will change things. That is literally what the word "adapt" means. What I'm not sure of is whether any of the changes between what the books say and what the films say is relevant to the time frame of the Fantastic Beasts films, to the backstory of Dumbledore and Grindelwald and Scamander and Flamel and the rest. And I'm just wondering in general about the mechanics of the author of a book series that was adapted into movies then going on to write her own movie prequels. It does sort of blur the lines that would otherwise be self-evident.






    But yes, that's exactly the point. The movies are just an interpretation of the books. The books are the full story as Rowling intended them; the movies are other people's attempt to create cinematic works inspired by them. It should go without saying that if books are made into movies, the movies are the secondary version, just an approximation of the real thing -- or that they're their own distinct works that use the books as a starting point but should be judged independently, like Blade Runner. Granted, the Potter movies are relatively more faithful to the books than most movie adaptations, but they're still just approximations, and they leave out a great deal of content, so they can hardly be considered the comprehensive version of the narrative.

    Of course, the FB movies may be written and produced by Rowling, but they're still directed by David Yates and also produced by Heyman, Kloves, etc. from the HP movies. So they're not "pure" Rowling, and as a rule, the director and producers have more clout over a movie's content than the screenwriter. So that would probably make these movies more closely aligned with the HP movie "reality" than the book "reality." But the question is, if Rowling weren't satisfied with how a previous movie depicted or changed something from the books, and she had an opportunity in these movies to address it again, which version would be reflected? Which is probably not a question that can be answered until or unless it happens.


    For all that fandom has tried to mythologize the word "canon" as some magic talisman, it's basically nothing more than a nickname for the original work as distinct from its adaptations or tie-ins. Generally, it's an enormously simpler matter than fandom makes it out to be. In this case, though, we have an original continuation that's by the original author, but is in the same medium as the adaptations and in collaboration with their creators. So that blurs the lines in an interesting way.
     
  4. FreezeC77

    FreezeC77 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Just because she is of Asian ethnicity you know Claudia Kim is going to be asked a lot if she is Cho Chang's ancestor. Like how just because he is Black, Samuel L Jackson kept getting asked if he was related to Lando.
     
  5. stardream

    stardream Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2015
    Location:
    in the Time Wave
    They weren't lovers. Dumbledore was infatuated with Grindelwald but it wasn't reciprocated. Grindie just exploited the situation, similar to what he did with Credence because that's what he does. This is from Rowling....

    JKR:
    [re: Grindelwald] I think he was a user and a narcissist and I think someone like that would use it, would use the infatuation. I don't think that he would reciprocate in that way, although he would be as dazzled by Dumbledore as Dumbledore was by him, because he would see in Dumbledore, 'My God, I never knew there was someone as brilliant as me, as talented as me, as powerful as me. Together, we are unstoppable!' So I think he would take anything from Dumbledore to have him on his side.
     
  6. DigificWriter

    DigificWriter Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 20, 2001
    Location:
    West Haven, UT, USA
    There's a statement on Pottermore that everything on the site is Canon, but that's the closest thing I've found to an official statement on the matter.

    One thing to consider about how the FB movies fit into the Canon is this: the first movie references, directly or indirectly, Canonical materials regarding the American Wizarding community that she purposefully debuted within a couple months of the movie being released in theaters.
     
  7. Hugo Rune

    Hugo Rune Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Location:
    On the rocks
    Well I found the below towards the top of page 1 of a Google Search with the words JK Rowling canon books films

    @Christopher This tweet was posted by JK following the release of Beasts last year. I'm presuming the original us focussed on that (and subsequent) film and the ongoung film franchise, but the question is a little open.

    Does this help your anguish?
     
    Brefugee and Allyn Gibson like this.
  8. Allyn Gibson

    Allyn Gibson Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2000
    Location:
    South Pennsyltucky
    If she is asked, I hope she says something, just to mess with people, like, "No, I'm Harry Potter's grandmother! He's quarter Asian, you know." :)
     
  9. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    Again, merely referencing an idea doesn't prove canonicity, because different and incompatible versions of the same series refer to the same characters and ideas all the time. Plus, obviously, Rowling wrote the movie script first and posted those details later, based on the worldbuilding she did for the movie (since it takes far more than two months to make a movie). Those "materials" were akin to the annotations I post on my own website, where I provide background information and worldbuilding details beyond what's in the actual stories. Any information about my original fiction that I post on my site, I consider to be canonical because it reflects my own vision of my creation -- well, until or unless I decide to contradict it in a later work, since the main works always take precedence. But it's a simpler matter for me, because hardly any of my original fiction has ever been adapted by anyone else, the one exception being the audiobook for Only Superhuman.


    "Anguish"? How in the world do you get "anguish" from my simple curiosity? This is purely an intellectual matter to me. As I said, it's unusual to go from a situation where the books are the original work and the movies are an adaptation thereof to a situation where the movies become the original work. So it seems natural enough to be curious about their relationship, because it isn't obvious in that case.

    Then again, I'm aware of at least one instance where it sort of went in the other direction. Arthur C. Clarke's novel 2001: A Space Odyssey and Stanley Kubrick's film of same were developed simultaneously as complementary creations, yet they had some substantial differences between them -- for instance, the monolith was at Saturn in the novel instead of Jupiter. (The book had the Discovery slingshot around Jupiter to get to Saturn, much as the Voyager probes would in the next decade, but Kubrick thought that was too confusing for the viewers, so he moved the Saturn part of the story to Jupiter.) However, when Clarke eventually wrote 2010: Odyssey Two (as a pure novel, with no movie plans at the time), he made it a sequel to the film version of 2001, with the Discovery and the monolith at Jupiter, because he knew that would be more familiar to his audience. Although shifting continuities like that is kind of a trivial case for Clarke, since he hardly ever wrote two works that were set in the same continuity, except for his Tales from the White Hart stories.
     
  10. DigificWriter

    DigificWriter Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 20, 2001
    Location:
    West Haven, UT, USA
    The stated goal of JKR timing the release of her MACUSA and Ilvermorney-focused Pottermore content updates when she did was to provide context for the plot of Fantastic Beasts and directly hype the film, so take that for what you will.
     
  11. Hugo Rune

    Hugo Rune Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Location:
    On the rocks
    @Christopher
    Because you've used 1200 words arguing the issue on this thread when you could have just tweeted her, like that dude in my link did. That's not a rational response to your query.

    But you appear more interested in over-intellectualised supercilious lines like "If you can't point me to an actual statement from Rowling or Warner Bros., then you don't have an answer to my question." rather than doing your own legwork.

    It's frustrating reading your posts. Your knowledge is remarkable. Your people skills, less so.
     
    Brefugee and The Nth Doctor like this.
  12. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    I don't have a Twitter account. And your definition of "rational" is odd. Exploring an idea in depth is not an expression of frenzied rage, it's generally an expression of thought and curiosity.


    And yet you're the one who goes straight to personal insult for no reason.
     
  13. JD

    JD Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Location:
    Arizona, USA
    All I get when I click Thread Tools is "Add Poll".


    The movies of Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, and Interview with The Vampire were written by the authors of the original novels, and I believe they made significant changes to the stories. This is only second hand though, I haven't read the books yet.
     
  14. Brefugee

    Brefugee No longer living the Irish dream. Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2007
    I must say, I'm quiet excited about this film, Where to find them was a great and enjoyable film and the more the better.

    I hope we even see some of the rise of young Tom Riddle (in number three most probably) that wasn't used in Half-Blood Prince.

    I can do that and you can do that as we are both Prem members, @JD can't, as, well, he isn't.

    Truer words have not been spoken.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2017
  15. Hugo Rune

    Hugo Rune Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Location:
    On the rocks
    @Christopher Firstly, "Anguish" was a hyperbolic aphorism.

    Secondly, there is a reason for my comment. The manner in which you have posted in here is remarkably patronising and your inability to recognise that is frustrating, especially given your career and education. A truthful comment about ones personality may feel like an insult, but it doesn't stop it being any more truthful.

    Thirdly, if you take that as an insult, so be it and report me, or I'll wait for the Warning.

    Finally, I apologise to the rest for helping derail this thread and if anyone feels further words are required on this topic we can go elsewhere
     
    Brefugee likes this.
  16. The Nth Doctor

    The Nth Doctor Infinite Possibilities... Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Location:
    Lost in a temporal and spatial anomaly
    Well, that's just lame. JD, then your best hope is to contact one of the moderators to fix the title.
     
  17. Brefugee

    Brefugee No longer living the Irish dream. Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2007
    Well, one needs to be rewarded (other than no-ads) for paying for Prem, or in your case, past crimes committed. :ouch:
     
    The Nth Doctor likes this.
  18. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    Well, like I said, you can't adapt a story to a different medium without changing it in some way. The goal is not to make an exact duplicate of the original; that would be pointless and redundant, because the original is right there. The whole reason for adapting a story is to do it in a different way.

    Besides, prose and film have different abilities and strengths, making it impractical to do a verbatim adaptation. Novels rely much more on internal monologue and detailed descriptions that would be tedious onscreen, if they could even be rendered visually at all. A number of reviewers commented on this regarding The Hunger Games, for instance. The books are told in first person from Katniss's POV, and they rely heavily on the contrast between what she shows outwardly to others and what she feels about it in her private thoughts, so a lot of that nuance was difficult to capture onscreen. Also, the movies had to create a lot of scenes that weren't from Katniss's POV, like much of the material with President Snow, and to use Caesar Flickerman's TV show to give a lot of exposition that the books could give in narration. And there's a lot that the movies just skipped over entirely. For instance, the movies never really established something I would've thought was fundamental -- why they were called the Hunger Games in the first place. The Capital presented the Games as a chance for the Districts to earn extra food and resources to ease their hunger and poverty, so that the whole thing could be twisted to seem like a benevolent, charitable exercise, which is part of why it was tolerated for so long. But the movies just presented them as punishment for the Districts' defiance, which was more simplistic and made it less plausible that it would've been accepted.

    Plus, of course, most novels are simply too long to adapt in a mere 2-2.5 hours. So movie adaptations are usually heavily trimmed down from the novels or exclude entire subplots. For instance, the movie of Ender's Game eliminated the book's subplot about Ender's older siblings Peter and Valentine using their equivalent of the Internet to manipulate and reshape global opinion back on Earth, even though that was a pretty important thread in the novel. I liked that movie overall, but it really didn't do Valentine justice at all.
     
  19. Shamrock Holmes

    Shamrock Holmes Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    All true, which is why I specifically stated that the screenplay is 'book canon' (as it is written by JKR, the true source of 'book canon'). Anything added in the process of translating the screenplay into the movie is 'movie [semi-]canon' at best.
     
  20. Shamrock Holmes

    Shamrock Holmes Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2009
    None of them. As a real person, LBJ is a distinct, knowable reality with a known appearance which is different from either (although both presumably resemble him to a greater or lesser degree)

    On the other hand, if you'd said which is canon for Hermione Granger (a fictional character), Emma Watson or Noma Dumezweni (and successors), I'd also have said 'neither' but clarified that Emma is closer to canon (especially if you accept book jacket illustrations are at least semi-canon).
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2017