strange_complex: (Amelia Rumford archaeologist)
I couldn't post this last night, because I just could not get onto LJ at any point after Doctor Who ended. So what follows was actually written in Yahoo! Notepad yesterday evening, and lightly edited this morning in order to get the tenses right.

Gosh, well. I think I can only possibly start writing about this with the end first )

So where the hell does this go now? )

Anyway, as for the rest of the story, yes, it did play out much like Three's encounters with our reptilian cousins )

The Doctor and Ambrose )

Nasreen Chaudhry )

So, Chris Chibnall may not be the most highly-regarded of Doctor Who writers, and it may well be that without the shock ending (which must surely have been largely Steven Moffat's work), this would have ended up as another largely predictable and forgettable story. But, as it was, it worked for me. Looking forward to yet more historical action next week.

Click here to view this entry with minimal formatting.

strange_complex: (Snape by JKR)
On Monday night, I finished reading Harry Potter and The Prisoner of Azkaban. I had a couple of questions in mind when I started reading this book. One, about how Sirius Black escaped from Azkaban, was quickly and easily answered. The other was already bigger when I first asked it. It hasn't been completely resolved by reading the book, but I now have further thoughts on the issue, so here I shall record them.

The question was whether or not a narrowing of Alan Rickman's eyes during the 'Shrieking Shack scene' in the film was consciously supposed to represent Snape using legilimency to discover Sirius Black's innocence, but still persisting in trying to get him Kissed by the Dementors anyway. Or, as [livejournal.com profile] innerbrat put it so nicely, I wanted to know whether Snape was 'the man who knows Sirius is innocent and wants him Kissed anyway.'

The short answer is that I could not find anything in the equivalent scene in the book which indicated that Snape was using legilimency at this point. The long answer, is, well, a lot longer. In essence, I now think that for Snape not to use legilimency at this point in the story is almost as bad as using it and then ignoring the information it yields.

For more details, follow these cuts:

The nature and extent of Snape's legilimency )

Lupin the legilimens )

Snape's agenda: self-delusion, or something worse? )

Last but not least, the Dumbledore factor )

My conclusion to all this? Well, canon Snape is not very nice, is he? I'm increasingly finding that I want to distinguish pretty sharply between Rickman-Snape and book-Snape. And while the first is troubled but sexy, the second is really very difficult to like.

Now, I am going to bed to start Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.
strange_complex: (Default)
I have now rewatched all three of the Harry Potter films. I can highly recommend the DVDs, especially for the numerous cut scenes included on each. Although you do generally have to leap through rather tedious hoops in order to get to see them, especially on the DVD of the first film where they are the reward you get for solving various puzzles. Great for hyperactive kiddies: merely irritating for adult film aficionados.

I have also begun reading The Prisoner of Azkaban, which is the first book in the series that I have not yet read. This, of course, means that I am reading it having already seen the film, so I have a couple of questions in mind which arose from seeing the film, and which I am hoping the book will either answer or, at least, illuminate.

Cuts follow for spoilers and rather excessive length:

Question one: Sirius Black and Azkaban )

Question two: Alan Rickman, J.K. Rowling and Snape's legilimency )
strange_complex: (Default)
I thought Harry Potter was perfectly OK already before this Christmas, but although I've seen all three films to date, I'd only bothered to read the first two books, and had then got bored. Then I re-watched Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone late on Christmas night, and also spent a fascinating half-hour at Valid.Pop on Tuesday quizzing [livejournal.com profile] damien_mocata, whose knowledge of the books is quasi-encyclopaedic, about the plots of books 3, 4 and 5. I now see that I seem to have stopped reading just at the point when the initial process of establishing characters and setting had been completed, and before the interesting plot-twists and surprises had really begun.

Therefore, I have been spending some time over the last two evenings mooching around on sites such as J.K. Rowling's official site, MuggleNet.com (which has some really impressive articles!) and The Harry Potter Lexicon. I've found out lots of interesting things, and I think I shall now aim to continue reading the books in the new year. (Not straight away, though, as I got several for Xmas which I want to finish first). I still don't think J.K. Rowling's writing is ever going to thrill me in quite the way Diana Wynne Jones' does. But I now have greater respect for her ability to set up complex plots and mysteries, and to create well-defined characters.

I also got myself sorted into a House:

Want to Get Sorted?

I'm a Ravenclaw!

It is kind of what I expected / hoped for after [livejournal.com profile] damien_mocata and [livejournal.com profile] captainlucy told me all about the characteristics of the different Houses on Tuesday, but it's nice to have it confirmed.

Profile

strange_complex: (Default)
strange_complex

April 2017

M T W T F S S
     12
3456789
101112131415 16
17181920212223
24252627282930

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sunday, 25 June 2017 06:57
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios