Books versus the Movies

I've always been one of those obnoxious movie goers who absolutely spit on novel based films. If the directors weren't using the book as the script, I used to leave the theater disappointed, angry, and hurt. But now, after seeing the newest Harry Potter movie, I understand why that is completely wrong.

When reading the final Harry Potter book, I was completely overwhelmed by how fast paced it seemed and how sad and dark it was, and because of the fact that it was the last book in the series, I devoured it in a day and a half. I remember thinking to myself, now that would be a great film.

Seeing it up there on the big screen, however, made me realize that the book is meant to be read, and only read, and the movie is meant to be seen, and only seen. They are two different experiences that really shouldn't be related to each other.

There were moments when Harry, Ron, and Hermione made their way through vast forests and towns searching for horcruxes that seemed to drag endlessly on, and I often was confused about what was going on. I had no idea why Harry carried around the shard of mirror, even though I know it plays an important role later on.

As someone who actually did read the book, I can't imagine what someone who didn't read it must have felt. There's so much to take in, to remember and piece together, and yet this is only part one of the finale.

Maybe this whole time, I really just never understood the concept of translating literary work into film. It's great when you can finally see your favorite story actually visualized, but is anything really ever as good as the tale that you loved in your own head? I don't think so. Some things just can't be compared, no matter how accurate it might be.

I love David Yates' camera work however, despite the minor plot flaws. And of course, I never realized how superb some of the acting is in those movies. I love the members of the Order, including David Thewlis as Remus Lupin and Brendan Gleeson as Mad Eye Moody, and who can ever forget the chilling face of Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort?

The characters, I think, will continue to survive way past the expiration date of the movies. Who knows? 100 years down the road (or maybe even less if things keep going like they have been) we might just be seeing new faces taking on the reins and retelling the story of the boy who lived.

Scanners

In the height of a holiday, travelers have been expressing their concern over the new body scanners that have recently debuted in airports throughout the country.

These body scanners can examine your bodies (through your clothing) in order to make sure no one is hiding dangerous weapons in undisclosed locations.

Opposers to these new machines say they are intrusive, due to the fact that anyone who objects to going through these scanners will be subjected to a full on pat down.

I was there one of the first days that the new backscatter machines actually were in use, and I watched as certain people walked through two large blue rectangular boxes, holding their arms upright and turning occasionally. I wasn't forced to go through and I don't recall many people having a problem.

I guess I just question why people are so afraid to walk through the scanners. You can say no, but then you are basically being molested by a stranger (for good purposes, mind you). Are people just that afraid to have someone else view them naked?

For starters, according to the TSA's website, features on a person are blurred so no distinction about who you are really can be made. An example of what a security guard sees is here. Also, those photos that are taken are not stored or reproduced.

Not to mention, how many times has it been brought up in casual conversation about how, as strict as standards are in the airports nowadays, you could really get some things past the guards. Drugs for instance, can be stored in the anal cavity, as well as weapons.

Considering how many of our people have worried obsessively since the attack on 9/11 about safety on airlines, is this something that really should be made a big deal? I'm all for privacy, mind you, yet when I'm on a plane, the last thing I want to be worrying about is careening 35,000 feet into the landscape below.

If you ask me, this could also be a great way to target obesity. Think about it. Those who are questioning these so called "intrusive" scanners are just terrified of having someone else view them naked (honestly, who would actually choose the pat down over a simple scan? I've heard it likened to sexual harassment, but really, I think those people are just bringing it onto themselves)

It scares me to think that society has really gotten to such a prude point. It's the 21st century! Being naked is not something we should be ashamed of, considering after all, that that's who we are as beings.

Maybe now that our bodies may be projected to strangers on a less than personal level, people will start realizing that they need to take better care of them selves. It's a long shot I know, but I feel as if this entire argument is stupid. You can't tell me that half of these protesters really care about some pat down that wouldn't even be administered unless they decided to receive it.

What do you care more about? Amped up security or insecurity about your body?