Author
|
Topic: Sorcerer or Philosopher
|
|
Hector J. Guzman
Oscar® Winner
|
The thing that bugs me is having to different movies. Well, it's actually the same(Duh!), but having a movie that they refer the rock as the sorcerer's stone and another as the philosopher stone distracts me a little. I have seen both, and that is not really important, but still, hehehe.NP. Harry's Wondrous World(Johnny boy)
  |
posted 12-05-2001 11:19 AM PT (US) ip
|
|
Jeron
Oscar® Winner
|
It was the same with the book, Hector. Just a different marketing tactic.
|
posted 12-05-2001 11:56 AM PT (US) ip
|
|
Nicolai P. Zwar
Oscar® Winner
|
The thing is, I've never heard of a "sorcerer's stone". What's that supposed to be? The philosopher's stone is an ancient legendary alchemic stone turning common metals into gold. But what's a "sorcerer's stone" supposed to be? I still don't get it why they changed that for the US release.
|
posted 12-05-2001 01:20 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
Alwin
Oscar® Winner
|
I read somewhere that Scholastic, the U.S. publisher for the Potter books wanted "Sorceror's Stone" instead of the everywhere-else title "The Philosopher's Stone." because of the reasons mentioned above.In Canada, we have the latter, and having read both the American and Canadian versions, there are several minor word changes such as "shan't" and "won't". I'm no grammar teacher (yet!) but it's just minor dialect changes... nothing earth-shattering. Fred and George rule! 
|
posted 12-05-2001 03:32 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
Marian Schedenig
Oscar® Winner
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alwin:
because of the reasons mentioned above.
Uhm, I don't see any reasons mentioned above...? I guess they just considered "Philosopher" too difficult for US citizens. Looking forward to The Master of the Necklaces: The Companions of the Necklace... 
|
posted 12-05-2001 05:01 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
Hasta
Oscar® Winner
|
I refuse to comment on this subject because, well, it gets me too angry.All these religious freaks (not all religious people are freaks of course, but the ones who take part in this "Potter is satanism/cultish for children" thing are nothing less than, well, a freak) are getting WAY out of hand, and they should be thrown in a firey pit. Of course, I don't really mean that...
Or do I???
|
posted 12-05-2001 05:11 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
Timmer
Oscar® Winner
|
LOL Marian, it's because faceless wonders consider the U.S. public too thick to understand the word 'Philosopher'...to all our great U.S. friends here on the board...your being sold short by these Hollywood idiots!Yeah, I know I didn't need to say that, but you know what I mean.
|
posted 12-05-2001 05:11 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
James
Oscar® Winner
|
quote:
Originally posted by Marian Schedenig:
The Master of the Necklaces: The Companions of the Necklace...
ROFL! Kirk, a member of the too-dense-to-buy-anything-with-the-word-"philosopher"-in-the-title-no-matter-how-much-sense-it-doesn't-make U.S. population
|
posted 12-05-2001 07:47 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
Jennie
Oscar® Winner
|
Hasta,
I know what you mean...I got into that with my roomie a few weeks ago. Mmm...it's a hard subject. Depends on your own perspective, mostly with your religion I guess. Although she and I have the same religion, different views on "Harry Potter" or "Halloween" or whatever other things.
This is way off topic so I shall stop. 
|
posted 12-05-2001 08:20 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
Lou Goldberg
Oscar® Winner
|
I think it's probably safe to assume that the word philosopher in our anti-intellectual society would be enough to cost the film box office. It's not that people don't know what it means, it's just that they associate philosophy with boredom and difficulty and abstract thinking that has no purpose in everyday life. Who wants that when you're going to the movies for fun and escape. Sorcery suggests what Harry Potter might be about. I mean would you go see something called 'Harry Potter and a symbol of alchemic change'?
|
posted 12-05-2001 09:24 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
SPQR
Oscar® Winner
|
'Dude, Where's My Car?' just about says it all.
|
posted 12-05-2001 09:46 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
Lancelot
Oscar® Winner
|
About what?
|
posted 12-05-2001 10:20 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
SPQR
Oscar® Winner
|
The price of tea in China. What else?
|
posted 12-05-2001 10:32 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
Lancelot
Oscar® Winner
|
Ahhh. Like one of those Zen riddles.
|
posted 12-05-2001 10:37 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
Lou Goldberg
Oscar® Winner
|
I mean who is Harry Potter anyway? If they really wanted to tell people what the film was about they'd call it 'Fun Warlock School' which is probably how it will be translated in China where they just cut to the chase anyway.
|
posted 12-05-2001 10:45 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
SPQR
Oscar® Winner
|
Harry Potter and the phrase, "cut to the chase", have no meaning to my programming._________________________________ The movie will probably be a real hit in the prisons over there though, that's a whole 3 hrs not slouched over a Singer pumping out Levi's. [Message edited by SPQR on 12-05-2001]
|
posted 12-05-2001 11:01 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
John Zimmer
Oscar® Winner
|
I personelly like Sorcerer more than philosepher. Np: Harry Potter and the Sorcer...er Philo er SCREW IT!!!  Jz
|
posted 12-06-2001 06:51 AM PT (US) ip
|
|
perfpitch
Oscar® Winner
|
Lou's right.There's probably no country -- with the possible exception of Pol Pot's Cambodia -- where exists such an institutionalized distrust of, and antagonism toward, intellectuals and intellectualism, as in the U.S. As such, it's hardly surprising that the word "philosopher" would send up little red flags in the minds of publishers and film studios. Moreover, "sorcerer" conjures up (pun intended) images of pointy-hatted wizards a la Camelot's Merlin, or Mickey Mouse in "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" segment of FANTASIA, while "philosopher" results in images of folks sitting around thinking (hardly an active, energetic pursuit around which you want to build a marketing campaign. As Merlin warned the young king in the musical "Camelot": "Arthur! It's too late for you to be out thinking!"). Frankly, the alliterative nature of the phrase "Sorcerer's Stone" rolls more easily off the tongue than the British original, and is an improvement. What's actually more troubling, however, are the changes in the books' text. When you start changing "shan't"s into "won't"s, you start to rob the language of its essential Britishness, and it starts to sink into an unfortunate sort of prosaic American mid-Atlanticism. J.K. Rowling wrote her books for a British readership; the American market to her is just gravy (an almost incomparably rich gravy, to be sure).
[Message edited by perfpitch on 12-06-2001]
|
posted 12-06-2001 11:04 AM PT (US) ip
|
|
Alwin
Oscar® Winner
|
Marian, I was referring to Nicolai's explanation:"The philosopher's stone is an ancient legendary alchemic stone turning common metals into gold." I'm not a fantasy or SF reader, so his explanation made sense to me. I do know that the reasons I gave were definitely discussed in the media somewhere. I believe I read it in Maclean's - the Canadian equivalent or Time, or Newsweek.
|
posted 12-06-2001 04:05 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
Marian Schedenig
Oscar® Winner
|
quote:
Originally posted by perfpitch:
What's actually more troubling, however, are the changes in the books' text. When you start changing "shan't"s into "won't"s
They did THAT, too!? Oh my, what happened to Hagrid??
|
posted 12-06-2001 09:33 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
James
Oscar® Winner
|
"Sorcerer's Stone" may sound better phonetically, but that doesn't negate the fact that "Philosopher's Stone" actually makes sense. But Perfpitch is correct, the Americanization of the speech is more disturbing. It makes absolutely no sense to have English kids using American colloquialism. Thankfully they didn't push that into the film. For instance, the usage of the word "bogey;" if I remember correctly, the American version of the book uses the word "booger."Bloody Americans! Kirk, one of such [Message edited by James on 12-06-2001]
|
posted 12-06-2001 09:56 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
Hector J. Guzman
Oscar® Winner
|
Wicked!
|
posted 12-07-2001 01:19 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
perfpitch
Oscar® Winner
|
Marian:According to Alwin's post, they did it, yes.
|
posted 12-07-2001 01:51 PM PT (US) ip
|
|
Marian Schedenig
Oscar® Winner
|
Flipping mental!
|
posted 12-08-2001 12:14 AM PT (US) ip
|
