Sirius/Remus was canon.... sort of
Apr. 3rd, 2011 02:56 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
danajsparks.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
deathtocapslockFrom the livetweet of a cast interview earlier today. http://twitter.com/#!/SnitchSeeker/status/54594602379919360
ETA: But then they later tweeted A thousand sorries, but just listened to the audio again, & Thewlis said he played Lupin as gay because of Cuaron, without JKR's knowledge.
ETA: But then they later tweeted A thousand sorries, but just listened to the audio again, & Thewlis said he played Lupin as gay because of Cuaron, without JKR's knowledge.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-04-03 08:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-03 08:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-03 08:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-03 08:52 pm (UTC)And it was bad enough what she did to the character of Tonks, now Tonks is nothing but a fag hag.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-03 08:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-03 08:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-03 08:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-03 08:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-03 09:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-03 09:31 pm (UTC)Frankly though I completely missed his gayness in the PoA movie.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-03 09:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 02:39 am (UTC)Ideally, Rowling shouldn't have paired up anyone without good plot-driven reason. Ambiguity gives the fanfic writers free reign to experiment with their favorite pairings and won't provoke any anger from people whose favored interpretations get shut down.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 03:07 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 03:36 am (UTC)I mean, I've had foot-in-mouth disease my whole life, so I understand sometimes you can say really stupid things you don't mean. Even though over the years I've learned to control my mouth more, I still occasionally come out with some really dunderheaded things. But even by my standards, that's an incredibly dumb statement. Even if I believed something that ridiculous--and I don't--I certainly would have better sense than to say so--in public, no less!
Danny, I can kind of see where you think Rowling meant she originally intended Lupin to be gay, then changed her mind later, but I really don't think that's what is meant here. It really does seem to mean she was talking about the character's thought processes, not her own. Weight is leant to that interpretation by the fact that the "apology" contains no retraction or clarification of the original statement. That is, it doesn't say, "JKR meant she created Lupin as gay, then changed her mind so he could marry Tonks." Instead, Thewlis just throws Cuaron (the director of the PoA movie) under the bus. There's no insistence that Rowling meant something else.
Honestly, JKR reminds me of Jim Carrey's character in the movie Liar, Liar, a pathological liar who was forced to tell the truth, whether he liked it or not. In her case, she wants to be a good liberal, but deep down she's really conservative, even reactionary, so despite her best efforts to present a liberal facade, her true conservatism keeps coming out.
On a lighter note, just think how much fun we'll have watching the Rowling apologists trying to spin this one! :D
no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 03:41 am (UTC)HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! You're kidding, right? This is J K Rowling we're talking about, not a thoughtful, logical writer who carefully plans her stories.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 03:57 am (UTC)The person who tweeted this out was just a fan listening to a live interview. She just misheard what Thewlis originally said. He said that Cuaron, without Rowling's knowledge, had told him that Lupin was gay, and then he had to reinterpret the character when Lupin got married in the books.
You can listen to the audio of the interview here. He speaks about 10 minutes in.
http://snitchseeker.com/harry-potter-news/audio-harry-potter-cast-at-apple-store-soho-deathly-hallows-panel-discussion-80606/
no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 04:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 04:31 am (UTC)OTOH, did you notice those idiotic remarks about the DH movie at the beginning of the conversation? I.e., they really truly, didn't make two DH movies because they were trying to milk the cow one more time before it died. No, indeed. It's just that the book was so rich and complex, they just had to make two movies out of it, unless they wanted it to be five hours long. Why, there was really enough material for three movies!
I repeat: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 04:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 05:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 09:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 09:12 pm (UTC)And it's only after he finds out he's going to be playing a married man that he's gotta change up his acting. Did that happen before or after POA?
Okay, wait wait wait, back the monkey train up.
Whats up with every time I read an article about one of the HP new movies, EVERY damn time they talk about a change in the movie that is different from the book. HOW come they always say, OH, this change is/was approved by JKR.
Or it's, JKR has looked and approved of the script and the changes we made, she understands why, etc. etc. to infenity and beyond.
So, this guy...totally goes out of a limb and decides Lupin is gay without approval or asking JKR. What happened to this all amazing she's involved bullshit they are always feeding us.
Now as I write this, I remember something about JKR having to tell a director or someone with the HBP movies that Dumbledore is gay because they were going to film some kinda scene where DD was talking about a girl he loved or something like that.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 09:23 pm (UTC)What there *wasn't* in the 7th book was enough *story* for even one decent film, let alone two.
So, instead we get a couple of special effects extravaganzas.
WHat did we expect? Pixar?
no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 09:26 pm (UTC)I seem to remember reading a few years back that when they first started filming PoA, that they decided to treat Lupin's "werewolf affliction" as if it was something akin to AIDS....
I can't remember if Thewlis decided to do this on his own, or whether Cuaron suggested it; so I don't think there was an outright decision to play Lupin as "gay" as such, just that AIDS is usually associated with homosexuality (altho it is not exclusive to that group).
Apparantly Jo was fine with this particular "spin" on the character, perhaps because they weren't doing it as "gay" per se...
no subject
Date: 2011-04-04 11:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-05 04:06 am (UTC)My two cents!
(That said, I think Rowling really did have her eye on the movie adaptation as she wrote. Hard to blame her, really; I would guess any novelist or aspiring novelist dreams of having his/her book made into a movie! But the forms are very different, and Rowling really didn't use the novel form at all well, IMHO.)
no subject
Date: 2011-04-05 07:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-05 03:35 pm (UTC)Where is my boomarang Horocrux when I need it, I gotta wack some Snape-bats...damn I haven't gotten to the right castle yet to obtain that boomarang Horocrux...But how shall I ever get the wonderful elder sword - Damnit Link-Harry, you said this adventure would be fun.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-05 08:12 pm (UTC)(That said, I think Rowling really did have her eye on the movie adaptation as she wrote. Hard to blame her, really; I would guess any novelist or aspiring novelist dreams of having his/her book made into a movie! But the forms are very different, and Rowling really didn't use the novel form at all well, IMHO.)
I've never played any of those games, so that didn't occur to me, but I can see where it makes sense.
However, I think you're being both too kind and inaccurate when you present Rowling when she wrote DH as a newbie writer overwhelmed by fame and success. PS/SS was published in 1997, and the movie rights were bought in 1998. By the time she wrote DH in 2006, she'd had almost a decade to get used to her fame and money, and to the idea her books were going to be movies. (Info from Wikipedia) She was also a 41-year-old married woman with three kids, not a girl just out of school or college.
Compare the DH train wreck to the work of two hugely-popular adult action/adventure writers, Iris Johansen and Stuart Woods. Neither Johansen nor Woods writes great art; their books are the literary equivalent of summer blockbuster popcorn thrillers. But their books are tightly-plotted, exciting, fun reads, with a clear delineation between good and evil. I wasn't expecting a masterpiece from JKR; she clearly doesn't have the talent or imagination for that. If she had just come up with something like the kids' version of a Woods or Johansen novel, I don't think too many people would have complained. What we got instead was boring, vapid, badly-written trash that contradicted much of the previous canon. That is inexcusable. As va32h once said about this on DTCL, "It's insulting, really."
And in case anyone wants to point out how huge and overwhelming Rowling's success was in comparison to Johansen's or Woods's, well--
JKR's success has been compared to that of the Beatles. The only thing that could make her look worse than she does already is to do an in-depth comparison of (1) how she handled her fame and success vs. how they handled theirs, and (2) her creativity vs. theirs. Abbey Road vs. Deathly Hallows. 'Nuff said.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-06 01:01 am (UTC)You may be interested in this. I found out today that HMS_STFU has closed, at least in part because they got some of their own back a few times (i.e., they got ridiculed on unfunny_fandom). They've moved over to a new comm called dedfromsnake, where they got worked up over our discussion here about Dumbledore a few weeks ago.
One member called mcity had this to say about DD: "He was a gay kid who made mistakes. He became an asexual adult, who also made mistakes. Most of the time, his mistakes had to do with the fact that he cared too much about people, romantically or otherwise, to be objective. That doesn't sound "strange"; that sounds like a human being." (Italics in original)
Leaving out that nonsense about DD being a "wizard who loved too much," I went, "What?" when I read the part about DD's going from gay to asexual. You can't exchange gay for straight or asexual, straight for gay or asexual, or asexual for gay or straight. This is the kind of intellectual giant who calls those of us on DTCL stupid and delusional.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-06 03:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-06 11:58 am (UTC)One can be homosexual or heterosexual and be celibate at the same time. That's what nuns, monks, priests, and other celibate members of the clergy do. Their sexual orientations don't change when they enter their vocation; they just choose to abstain from sexual behavior.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-06 04:29 pm (UTC)In fairness, the books don't say that he's straight either. Even post-Tonks it's very questionable.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-07 02:11 am (UTC)He was a gay kid who made mistakes. He became an asexual adult, who also made mistakes. Most of the time, his mistakes had to do with the fact that he cared too much about people, romantically or otherwise, to be objective. That doesn't sound "strange"; that sounds like a human being." (Italics in original)
Hum...a gay kid who made mistakes? Oh yea, I guess if a person considers the enslavement of a whole population of people (muggles)as a gay kid making mistakes.
The trouble is Dumbledore was not 6 or 8 years old, he was well into his teenage years by the time this crap with Gellard happens,in fact I think he's almost close to being considered an adult in the magical world. Can't remember exact age when he met Gellard, but really...a kid I might disagree with. He was at an age where he should have known that world domination of muggles was a bad idea.
This isn't a youth who is stupid that drove down a one way street the wrong way after getting his drivers license. This was him and Gellard wanting to rule the world and make muggles their personal playthings.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-07 02:20 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-07 02:08 pm (UTC)I love your icon, BTW. It reminds me of Iris Johansen's novel, The Search, in which a woman and her search-and-rescue dog have a telepathic connection. They rescue a wolf caught in a leghold trap, and the dog and wolf fall in love. He tells his mistress about his feelings with one word thoughts such as "beautiful" and "love."
AD/GG, Part 1
Date: 2011-04-07 02:38 pm (UTC)"Then he begins talking about Grindelwald:"
You cannot imagine how his ideas caught me, Harry, inflamed me. Muggles forced into subservience. We wizards triumphant. Grindelwald and I, the glorious young leaders of the revolution.
"He's omitting the fact that he was writing advice to Grindelwald on enslaving the Muggle population, rather than killing them. And that it was all for the greater good. In fact, he's making it sound like everything bad was Grindelwald's idea, and he was just caught up in the moment. Coward. Liar."
It would all be for the greater good, and any harm done would be repaid a hundredfold in benefits for wizards.
"Because only wizards count, y'know. Muggles aren't really people. They don't bleed if you kill them.
"He also says that the Deathly Hallows were at the center of their plans for political power. Yeah, I know that every politician I've ever heard of builds his ambitions on legendary objects whose existence can't be confirmed. Personally, I suspect that Grindelwald wanted power, and hey, if he could get the Hallows as well, that would be great. Dumbledore is the one who seems fixated on the Hallows themselves...to the point where, when one came into his hands accidentally, he couldn't let it go."
The unbeatable wand, the weapon that would lead us to power!
"Okay, that is just stupid. Only one person at a time can be the owner of a wand, and only one person at a time can wield it. So I don't see how both of them could use the Elder Wand. Were they planning on becoming conjoined twins?"
The Resurrection Stone – to him, though I pretended not to know it, it meant an army of Inferi!
"If Dumbledore knows that the Stone can create Inferi, why does he say later that Voldemort didn't know what the Stone was? He certainly created Inferi. A whole lake of them."
To me, I confess, it meant the return of my parents, and the lifting of all responsibility from my shoulders.
""Hi, Mum! Hi, Dad! Listen, I'm just going to summon you back from the dead so that you can take care of my crazy sister, not me! You don't mind giving up Heaven for that, do you?"
"After admitting that neither of them thought much about the Cloak beyond "we need it to complete the set, and once one of us has it, he'll be invincible," Dumbles starts talking about Ariana's death. The way he puts it is interesting. He doesn't say Grindelwald killed his sister. But he sure tries to give that impression."
Grindelwald lost control. That which I had always sensed in him, though I pretended not to, now sprang into terrible being.
"This fits what Aberforth said about Grindelwald suddenly starting to torture him. I would say that getting into an argument and torturing your opponent constitutes losing control. Especially when the penalty is a one-way ticket to Azkaban."
And Ariana...after all my mother’s care and caution...lay dead upon the floor.”
"It's a strangely passive way of putting it. Aberforth described a much more active scene. He was being tortured; Grindelwald was doing the torturing; Albus wasn't trying very hard to stop the torture; and Ariana just wanted it all to end, because it was upsetting her.
"And he and Aberforth have already said that Albus Dumbledore had good reason for wanting Ariana dead and gone.
"But telling the truth isn't important to Dumbledore. It's all about him and his public, even though right now, he only has a public of one.
"The Dumb One continues to try to blame Grindelwald without exactly saying that Grindy killed Ariana."
TBC
AD/GG, Part 2
Date: 2011-04-07 02:42 pm (UTC)"Schemes for Muggle TORTURE. Which Dumbledore had encouraged, and helped him plan. Here's a clue, Harry—slavers and torturers are not generally considered heroes!"...
"The Dumb One then tells Harry that he was afraid of Grindelwald. Not because the Grinch could kill him, or because of the horrific curses he might plague the Dumb One with. No. Something a lot more basic."
You see, I never knew which of us, in that last, horrific fight, had actually cast the curse that killed my sister.
"There were three of you. One was torturing. One was being tortured. And one was you. Who do you think did it?"
I dreaded beyond all things the knowledge that it had been I who brought about her death, not merely through my arrogance and stupidity, but that I actually struck the blow that snuffed out her life.
"Oh, sweet Jesus! YOU MURDERED HER. At least have the guts to own up to it!
"Dumbledore tells Harry that he was scared of meeting Grindy because he "thought" that Grindy knew what scared him. Frankly, I think it was more a question of Grindelwald knowing damned well what had happened, and Dumbles not being able to face it. Gellert Grindelwald, after all, was under no obligation to preserve Albus Dumbledore's' bubble reputation.
"Scared of having the truth come out and being disgraced, the Dumb One stalled for very nearly the whole of World War II."
--------
This isn't a youth who is stupid that drove down a one way street the wrong way after getting his drivers license.
No, that would be Ron. LOL
For those who want to read all the wonderful Deadly Hollows sporkings, the link is here. http://community.livejournal.com/deadlyhollow/2007/07/18/
no subject
Date: 2011-04-07 02:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-07 02:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-07 03:04 pm (UTC)Good point about the Beatles!
no subject
Date: 2011-04-07 04:44 pm (UTC)I didn't make the icon; I just found it somewhere. I'm pretty sure that both animals in the icon are wolves, but who knows, maybe a fan of the book decided to make an icon for it.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-07 05:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-04-07 06:42 pm (UTC)Well, do we really know that for a fact?
Rowling doesn't go into the romantic/sexual lives of any of the Hogwarts staff, with the possible exception of Hagrid and Filch/Pince.
We know nothing about McGonagall, Flitwick, Sprout, Sinistra, Trelawney, etc. Dumbledore could well have had other homosexual relationships before, and after, Grindewald. They may have been actual relationships that ended for whatever reason, they may have been nothing but one night stands. We just don't know for sure.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-07 10:07 pm (UTC)LOL! You win the internet. If I didn't know better I'd think Snape wrote your comment.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-07 10:09 pm (UTC)Re: AD/GG, Part 1
Date: 2011-04-07 10:12 pm (UTC)I just couldn't remember if he was still in Hogwarts in his last year or just out. So that makes it even worse really.
But yea and to put it simply, Dumbledores full of beans.
no subject
Date: 2011-04-07 10:22 pm (UTC)Anybody remember the movie Airplane where the kid goes up in the cockpit and the pilot asks him some questions:
Captain Oveur: You ever been in a cockpit before?
Joey: No sir, I've never been up in a plane before.
Captain Oveur: You ever seen a grown man naked?
Now for whatever reason, thats how I'm seeing Dumbledore now, as the captain in Airplane. I have no idea why.