DVD Talk Forum

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   DVD Talk Archive (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk-archive-54/)
-   -   Now that Chris Colombus' Harry Potter run is over... (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk-archive/284711-now-chris-colombus-harry-potter-run-over.html)

RocShemp 04-08-03 09:12 PM

Now that Chris Colombus' Harry Potter run is over...
 
I remeber reading a while back that Chris Colombus was planning on re-releasing Harry Potter And The Sorcerer's Stone on DVD with more "adult" extras, no games necessary to access the extras, and an audio commentary once he was done making the first two Harry Potter films. My question is now that his Harry Potter run is over will this re-release actually happen? If so, will he also work on a re-release of Harry Potter And The Chamber Of Secrets as well (maybe to coincide with the theatrical release of Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire)?

I ask because I've held off from buying the first Harry Potter film for so long and now that I just rented Harry Potter And The Chamber Of Secrets (I sadly missed it duiring its theatrical run) I'm really tempted topurchase both films right now but am still afraid that this re-release is somewhere around the corner.

PixyJunket 04-08-03 09:22 PM

I say wait for the re-release, which could be next year, or 10 years from now.

Meanwhile.. I'll have watched the current discs a gazillion times by then.

Enjoy!

pdjennings 04-08-03 09:37 PM

Buy them! They're cheap enough.... and I'd rather have something in my hands than hold off and be without it for..... months? years? more?

If a re-release happens.... all the better!

bboisvert 04-08-03 10:56 PM


Originally posted by RocShemp
I ask because I've held off from buying the first Harry Potter film for so long
I've seen this DVD several times during the past year for like 7 or 8 bucks... why bother waiting?

Yes, they'll eventually re-release this. As they will re-release just about every blockbuster film. But that is really cancelled out by the fact that most stores practially give it away upon release. I'd rather get it now for the price of 2 rentals rather than sitting around wondering about it for 2-3 years in the hopes that the director has time to record a commentary track.

RocShemp 04-08-03 11:02 PM

Where have you seen it for $7 or $8? The cheapest I've ever seen Harry Potter And The Sorcerer's Stone for is $20.

PolloDiablo 04-08-03 11:19 PM

This would be great, my girlfriend absolutely loves Harry Potter and so I've bought her the two current DVDs, but I've held off getting them for myself since I can't ever justify buying something I can just borrow from her whenever I want. But if they do re-release them then I would have no problem buying them for myself, especially if they aim the extras a little more towards the adult crowd, I would love to see some good documentary type of stuff and a good commentary on this film.

Rammsteinfan 04-08-03 11:30 PM

I got my Harry Potter And The Sorcerer's Stone on the first day for $9.99 last year.

BizRodian 04-08-03 11:34 PM

Import it from Canada. No bilingual packaging, and the correct title :D

RocShemp 04-09-03 12:42 AM

BizRodian,

About that: how is "The Philosoupher's Stone" the correct title when in the film the item in question constantly refered to as the Sorcerer's Stone? Did they do an alternate ADR for the US release of the film?

Anyhoo, I guess I'll buy the film IF I findit as cheep as some have mentioned. I guess I can trade itin at EB if a new edition is released.

DVDGUY1116 04-09-03 12:51 AM


Originally posted by RocShemp
how is "The Philosoupher's Stone" the correct title when in the film the item in question constantly refered to as the Sorcerer's Stone? Did they do an alternate ADR for the US release of the film?
In every other part of the world, with the exception of the US, the title of the book is Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. The book title was changed for the US release as the publisher thought it would be easier for American's to understand what a Sorcerer's Stone is rather than a Philosopher's Stone...eventhough they are the same thing. All the mention's of a Philosopher's Stone were changed to Sorcerer's Stone in the US publishing of the book and yes they did do ADR on all stone reference's in the movie.

RocShemp 04-09-03 01:00 AM

Interesting. Tough I'm preplexed astowhy the publishers of the book would assume that Americans would be unfamiliar with the term Philosopher's Stone.

So I amcorrectin assuming that the Canadian DVD notonly has the correct title but also lacks the ADR alterations found in the US release? With that in mind, how does the Canadian DVD compare to the US DVD sound/transfer-wise?

BizRodian 04-09-03 01:25 AM

The philospher's stone is a REAL item in mythology. Having it changed is like changing the ark of the covenat in Raiders of the Lost Ark to "The magic box" because people think an ark is a boat.

Nicholas Flamel was a REAL person in the 14th century who tried to create a Philospher's Stone which would give him eternal life, and turn lead into gold. Some people belive he succeded, and actually created the Philospher's Stone.

http://paranormal.about.com/library/graphics/flamel.jpg

But that's all ruined, because the american publisher thought kids in the US were too stupid to pick up a book with a funny word in the title.

The Canadian DVD is identical other then the name changes on the cover and in the movie... (yes, they use the correct name in the film.) There might be a tiny bit of extra text on the back that has the Canadian rating, but you'd not notice unless you really looked hard. That is all. There is no reason not to get the true version.

eedoon 04-09-03 07:21 AM


Originally posted by BizRodian
The philospher's stone is a REAL item in mythology. Having it changed is like changing the ark of the covenat in Raiders of the Lost Ark to "The magic box" because people think an ark is a boat.

Nicholas Flamel was a REAL person in the 14th century who tried to create a Philospher's Stone which would give him eternal life, and turn lead into gold. Some people belive he succeded, and actually created the Philospher's Stone.

http://paranormal.about.com/library/graphics/flamel.jpg

But that's all ruined, because the american publisher thought kids in the US were too stupid to pick up a book with a funny word in the title.

The Canadian DVD is identical other then the name changes on the cover and in the movie... (yes, they use the correct name in the film.) There might be a tiny bit of extra text on the back that has the Canadian rating, but you'd not notice unless you really looked hard. That is all. There is no reason not to get the true version.

That was interesting. Where did you get that information?

PalmerJoss 04-09-03 07:44 AM

Now that Chris Columbus' run on Harry Potter is over...I am happy. I can't wait to see what a director like Alfonso Cuaron will bring to the screen, especially with a movie like Prisoner of Azkaban(my personal favorite Harry Potter novel). I would happily buy a SE of the films in the future when they are released.

RichardW 04-09-03 07:55 AM


Originally posted by BizRodian
Import it from Canada. No bilingual packaging, and the correct title :D
That's what I did! :up:

adamblast 04-09-03 08:34 AM


Originally posted by RichardW
That's what I did! :up:
Me too -- not to mention buying the book thru Amazon UK... :)

Avid 04-09-03 09:49 AM


Originally posted by BizRodian
Import it from Canada. No bilingual packaging, and the correct title :D
Still talking about the different titles? At least it gives Canadians another since of national pride to go along with drinking Americans under the table because the alcohol content in their beers is higher.

Both of the movie titles are the correct version. They reflect the title of the book released in that country and whether Scholastic should or shouldn’t have done that is a different debate.

Back to the original topic of this thread. RocShemp, since you have waited this long and the DVD release of Chamber of Secrets is around the corner, you might want to wait a few more weeks to see if any new information about the SE comes out. News of the SE came out the day of The Sorcerer's Stone DVD release, just as talk of a Grease SE came out the day that movie came to DVD.

sherm42 04-09-03 10:43 AM

Just FYI on Chris Columbus and his involvement in HP. He is still a producer on Prisoner and he has stated that he is seriously considering directing Goblet of Fire as it is his favorite of the books. Although he is not directing the current version, he still seems to be very busy with the movies. I'd say, just buy them.

As for the alternate versions, they did not use ADR, which means they simply dubbed new lines over the existing ones. They actually shot alternate takes the different versions. Small but important difference.

RocShemp 04-09-03 12:29 PM

Oh okay. I was gonna see if I caught it on TV again as I was amazed I didn't catch the lipsinc issue that would arise from an ADR to the lines in the movie.

As for Alfonso Cuaron, I am not really looking forward to his involvment as director in the next Harry Potter film as I hated Y Tu Mama Tambien and even though I liked A Little Princess I don't see his style working with a film like Harry Potter. But I'll still keep an open mind as I'm looking forward to see Michael Gambon as Dumbledore (this is no longer a rumour, right?) and Garry Oldman too.

I think it's good though that Colombus is still there as producer, though, and that (if he directs Harry Potter And The Goblet Of Fire) he is considering splitting the fourth book into two movies so as not to have to cut too much out.

But I suppose I may just wait as Avid suggested. Even though I've waited all this time (sometimes feels like too long) I guess a few more weeks wont hurt me.

BTW, Avid, why do you say that the release of Harry Potter And The Chamber Of Secrets is "around the corner"? Isn't it already available? Or was this a rent-through?

Philip Reuben 04-09-03 01:14 PM


Originally posted by sherm42
As for the alternate versions, they did not use ADR, which means they simply dubbed new lines over the existing ones. They actually shot alternate takes the different versions. Small but important difference.
They did either, depending on the scene. More than once, the person saying the name of the stone was off-camera (eg. when Hagrid slams the door of his hut, and the kids say, "We know about the Philosopher's Stone!"), and then they would have just used ADR to add the dialogue, probably in both versions.


Originally posted by RocShemp
BTW, Avid, why do you say that the release of Harry Potter And The Chamber Of Secrets is "around the corner"? Isn't it already available? Or was this a rent-through?
It comes out on Friday. I can't wait! :)

BizRodian 04-09-03 01:56 PM

eedoon I got the information from my head. The picture came from about.com :)


Still talking about the different titles? At least it gives Canadians another since of national pride to go along with drinking Americans under the table because the alcohol content in their beers is higher.
Xenophobic comments have NOTHING to do with this. Why on earth did you bring that up?

I said import the Canadian version because it's the only region 1 title with the original title. Both discs are made by the same people... just most would prefer to have the version that was originally intended by the author, judging by how everone want's OAR.

If I was her, I would have made them change the title back for the american release. But I remember her once saying she heard a child pronounce a character's name wrong, and then corrected the child. Later on, she felt bad because the child's the one doing the reading, and could call the character whatever they wanted. I guess that's the logic here, and I'm fine with that... but I'd rather have the version intended, the version correct in history.


Both of the movie titles are the correct version. They reflect the title of the book released in that country and whether Scholastic should or shouldn’t have done that is a different debate.
No, it's what I'm talking about now. They shouldn't have changed it for the book, and they shouldn't have kept changed it for the movie...

eedoon 04-09-03 03:58 PM


Originally posted by BizRodian
eedoon I got the information from my head. The picture came from about.com :)

Oh. Can I have your head (not in some pervert kind of way!) :p

DVDGUY1116 04-09-03 05:00 PM


Originally posted by RocShemp
As for Alfonso Cuaron, I am not really looking forward to his involvment as director in the next Harry Potter film as I hated Y Tu Mama Tambien and even though I liked A Little Princess I don't see his style working with a film like Harry Potter.

I am not a big fan of Chris Columbus and I am not that familiar with Alfonso Cuaron's work; however, I am not that worried about the Director change. From what I understand it can't hurt. I really believe that there is nothing to worry about as JK Rowling has such an enormous say in everything that goes into the movies and I doubt Warner's will allow him to do anything to seriously alter the look or feel of the film...just in case a change he makes causes the film to only make a 500 million worldwide as opposed to nearly a billion! I would like to see a Director come in and make a Harry Potter movie that doesn't quite follow the book so closely,like the first two do, and instead adapt their vision and take on the book...like PJ did for Lord of the Rings.

As for the casting...I am really looking forward to Oldman as well. My only hope is that they put a lot of the history of that character, which is discussed at the end of the book, towards the beginning of the movie as I don't want to wait till the end to watch him act.


That was interesting. Where did you get that information?
eedoon, while I have no doubt that BizRodian had the knowledge about the Philosopher's Stone in his head you can also find it and the facts behind the title changes on many Harry Potter sites such as www.mugglenet.com and www.The-Leaky-Cauldron.org.

BizRodian 04-09-03 05:40 PM

Thanks for the links DVDguy!

Avid 04-10-03 03:20 AM


Originally posted by BizRodian
Xenophobic comments have NOTHING to do with this. Why on earth did you bring that up?
It wasn't meant as an insult. I was wondering why you brought the different titles into the thread, most people already know about them.

The Philosopher’s Stone was published in Britain in 1997, and the Sorcerer's Stone was published in the United States in 1998. That is (part of) the book's history. I believe both of the titles are correct and we should agree to disagree on this.

IMHO The Sorcerer's Stone is one of the correct titles because the author and publisher chose to name it so before the initial United States printing. Not only did J.K. Rowlings agree to the change, she allegedly came up with The Sorcerer's Stone. Since a name was created for a certain part of the world and with the author’s participation, I believe that name is a legitimate, true, correct name.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:58 PM.


Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.