![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
torino10154 is still away on holidays, so I'll post her next question this week:Compare and contrast book!Snape with movie!Snape. What do the movies get right? What is just oh so wrong?
torino10154 is still away on holidays, so I'll post her next question this week:Compare and contrast book!Snape with movie!Snape. What do the movies get right? What is just oh so wrong?
I know the films required one of the characters to become the comic relief, and I fully understand why Snape got slotted into that role, but God. That is just so OOC.
I kept asking why Snape was so mean to Harry, and then why in POA he protected the trio from the werewolf. It seemed out of character for him, just the movie him, for him to do that.
I also felt he was fairly humerous in the first movie...I finally read the books and realized he's not the comic relief, his eyes are black, not dark brown (not sure why they don't just give AR black conctacts) his hair is greasy not silky like in the movies and for goodness sakes, his character is only a few yrs older than me and AR, God bless him, is oh 30 yrs or so older than me.
Also he's in the books so much more than in the movies, so I'm glad I read them finally.
Yes slapping Ron and Harry in GOF and OOTP is funny in the movie but he never does stuff like that in the books. He's a much more major character in the books and lately he's a glorified extra in the movies. I swear if you were not paying close attention you'd forget he's even a spy in the movies.
So again, I'm just glad I took her advice and read the books, I find them worlds different from the movies.
I hear that "black" is a colloquialism for an extremely dark, dark brown, i.e., they appear black without special lighting. I don't think true black is a possible pigmentation for human irises. Alan's eyes are pretty dark; they work for me in most scenes. I was more bothered by Alec Hopkins's eyes which are a lighter brown. (But neither of these bothered me as much as DanRad's eyes, which are blue when they should be such a remarkable green...)
his hair is greasy not silky like in the movies and for goodness sakes
Yes, it seems that movie!Severus has a stylist to hand... ;)
I think also that book!Severus is much more twitchy and snappish in demeanor. I like movie!Severus but in that sense they "got it wrong".
I do love AR Snape though, in the 'wrong-sense' at least. Can't imagine AR as 'twitchy'.
This is true. My friend is an optometrist and she has told me that there are no such things as 'black eyes' or, specifically, black iris color. The closest thing would be a dark dark brown - which at first glance, will appear to be black.
Also, only rare genetic mutations can lead to black, red or violet iris color.
:)
Of course, Tonks at times has pink or purple hair, colors not possible for us Muggles without a bottle of hair dye. Although I guess that doesn't count because she just magically changes the natural color of her hair...which I think was brown, when she temporarily lost her powers in HBP?
I'm probably overthinking this question way too much, but I do like the idea of Snape actually having black eyes. ^_^
As Emma Thompson said of Rickman, "Alan would be mysterious reading the phone book."
I like the costume and I'm sort of okay about the hair. I wish it were a little longer.
Also, Alan Rickman seems (and apparently is) very intelligent. That's key to Snape.
I like his air of melancholy. I think that's something we would have missed had Tim Roth been cast--although Roth would have been excellent, too.
I don't mind the physical moments--the little slaps. But I do find them very out of character. I like them because you can see the kids are trying to crack up--but Harry wouldn't be finding it funny. He'd be storing it up in his moleskin purse o' hate along with all the other times that Snape ruined his life.
I agree that Snape's barely in the movies at this point. I'm sure that will be different in HBP, because he's the friggin' title! Plus he kills Dumbledore. :)
But it was disappointing to see how little we saw of Snape in OotP. Also, I didn't like him looking at the reflection of Lily and James and saying, "I may vomit." That seemed like too cheap a thing for even Snape to say--and after DH, he'd never vomit at Lily!
Oh, one thing I did love about OotP!Snape was that, when he took Harry down to the dungeon to do Occlumency, he rolled out this leather wand carrier with a bunch of different wands and selected one to use. Like Snape's got a dozen wands--all for different magical tasks. Bwaahahaha.
And, I have to admit that Rickman is older and heavier than I think of Snape being. But it's a minor, minor point. If you look at Rickman in the late eighties, he's a good age and shape for Snape. But you couldn't have cast him at that point in his career, because he'd have blown the other actors off the screen like wheat chaff... sort of like he did with Kevin Costner in Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves.
Didn't Snape say "Feeling sentimental?" in regards to the Potter family in the Mirror of Erised then say "I may vomit" in regards to watching Sirius and Harry hug? But yeah, regardless, I agree that the latter wasn't very Snape-like.
The slapping of students on the other hand never bothered me much, mostly because that was actually funny. Also, they just need to show that Snape is a little uncomfortable as a teacher and the best way to show tings in a movie is action.
Just a minor quibble, but I agree with Montavilla that I wish movie-Snape's hair was longer--it's described as "shoulder-length" in the books, I believe. But then, I am partial to guys with long hair. ^_^ (Readers of my Always series might have noticed that nearly all the guys have long hair.)
The slapstick violence in GoF (whacking Harry and Ron with a book, and pushing their heads down for talking during a test) doesn't bother me as much as it does some other fans I've talked to, but it's definitely OOC.
It's not Rickman's fault and he certainly does the best with the scripts he's given, but there is just not enough of Snape's backstory in the movies. Although POA is visually beautiful, it's my least favorite film because they cut out the entire story of the Prank and how James saved Snape. And the Snape's Worst Memory scene in OotP was cut to a brief montage, but I guess I should be glad that they didn't cut it out altogether. Still, in hindsight, it seems like it will severely weaken the story of Snape's redemption in DH, because there hasn't been enough foreshadowing laid to explain the Snape/Lily thing. They can still show it in a flashback, of course, but I don't think it will have the same impact as if the background had been gradually built up as it was in the books.
Of course, Book 7 hadn't been published when the POA movie was made, so that isn't entirely Cuaron's fault, but I think the full SWM scene should have been included in OotP, since DH was out by then. The scene with Lily was so important--how could they have left it out?! (Okay, sorry, rant over.)
I also wonder how much the films influenced the writing of the later books. The first film was released in 2001, when JKR was writing OotP. There is a definite shift in the perception of Snape between the earlier books and the later ones - whether this is Jo's development of character or Alan's portrayal is an interesting point. Jo isn't good at physical description - the black eyes and greasy hair are about all there is of Snape in earlier books (dammit, some time ago I went through the books looking for canon evidence for his deep voice and long fingers and I can't remember now whether I found the former (but not the latter) in a post-OotP book!) So physically I can argue for the films getting Snape's looks right (much better than Lupin and Dudley at any rate), though almost any actor of the right age with the right wig and make-up could do that (this is where I put in my bid for [icon] Mark Strong).
Mr Rickman also gets Snape's snark and menace right, and I love the way he plays the scene in the Shrieking Shack in PoA; confusion, anger, the attempt to protect Harry, and the throwback to the schoolday dynamic between Sirius, Remus and Snape is better than the book description of the same scene.
But, like others, I don't like the physical abuse - book!Snape can flay students with his tongue - he doesn't need to hit them (though I'd believe a thrown piece of chalk or a stinging hex in lieu of a thump with a ruler).
On balance AR isn't my Snape - but by the end of Book 6 he may have been Rowling's...
(And I still think that Snape's death scene owes an awful lot to the Sherriff of Nottingham's.)
Did you mean pre-OotP?
I don't think you found anything about a "deep" voice because I don't believe the pitch of it is described per se (his normal speaking voice, anyway, as opposed to when he shrieks, etc). There's adjectives about volume (e.g. "low") and expression ("bored", "deadly") and tonal qualities ("silkily") but not pitch AFAIR.
I don't hear a deep one in my head, myself. It's hard to get away from Alan Rickman who has such a nice one, which is a quality that works for Snape, but actually in my imagination Snape has a slightly higher pitch than that. It's still a voice that would sound good even reading the phone book though. ;)
A lot of people have long fingers, it seems, including Dumbledore (who gets a lot of mentions), Voldemort ("unnaturally" so), Ollivander, and even Trelawney (!). Narcissa has "thin" fingers, but I didn't run across a mention of them being long.
Severus gets a mention in OotP specifically, in "Occlumency":
Snape eyed Harry, tracing his mouth with one long, thin finger as he did so.
And in GoF, in "The Weighing of the Wands":
‘And what is all this noise about?’ said a soft, deadly voice. Snape had arrived.
The Slytherins clamoured to give their explanations. Snape pointed a long yellow finger at Malfoy and said, ‘Explain.’
‘Potter attacked me, sir –’
(Which is also an example of describing volume and expression, not pitch, of his voice.)
BTW I think "yellow" there is meant to be his skin tone, not staining. Fanon often has him having "potions-stained" hands and somehow that has never sat right with me.
Movie Wrongs!
the loss of Marauder/Snape backstory in POA--and--how the movie changed the exit from the SS. That scene of Snape being left in the SS, recovering consciousness, dashing out--fine so far, if different. But then to fling himself bodily between the kids and the werewolf, and just gape after Harry when Harry takes off? We Snapefans have given that scene our okay because it vindicated our feelings that Snape was actually very protective of the kids, but REALLY. That's what Sirius or James might have done (come to think of it in DH it's what James was shown to have done). Even concussed, Snape has more brains than that. He'd have grabbed Hermione's wand and blasted the damn beast, and stupefied Harry if need be. OOC!
I agree too that they shortened the SWM scene way too much (and leaving out Lily just destroys the eventual point), but they also did something worse. In canon, when Harry broke through into Snape's mind Snape PRAISED him (while being obviously upset at having been invaded). What made Harry's seeing the SWM scene so bad was that Harry had deliberately pried into memories he knew Snape was trying to protect from him. In the movie, Snape throws Harry out for being successful at what he was supposed to be teaching him. In canon, Harry's in the wrong (as well as seeing that his dad and Sirius are in the wrong); in the movie, Harry's really in the right.
One thing I do like very much about the movies: Snape's clothes. It seems to me that someone who'd been dangled upside down by James in front of the whole school and who has a Dark Mark to hide has good REASON to wear all those buttons. I know robes are canon, but I think he'd find a version of Wizarding garb that gave him more--protection from being exposed, and the Victorian style works for me.
And I like Rickman in general--too heavy, yes, but the age isn't a problem for me; Snape, Lupin, and Black are all prematurely aged (and I agree with the poster who says it emphasizes the Harry-view of all adults being ancient). (God, Snape's a BABY--31! when Harry enters Hogwarts. But I really think he'd look older.)
One tiny bit I loved in the movie SS: if you look closely, Snape's actually the one who knocks over Quirrell (in the scuffle to put out his robes), and at the end of the excitement there's an instant where you see an almost-smile of satisfaction on his face. And then he schools himself to be peeved at Gryffindor winning.
Re: Movie Wrongs!
Very true, and another thing. In the book, when Harry breaks through, Snape is still in control. I'm sure he's not happy about Harry seeing any of his memories, and those ones are rather upsetting, but he allows Harry a moment or two and then pushes him out.
Those are memories which might have helped them build sympathy--and Harry does feel a little bad for the boy who is crying the corner (and you get the feeling that Snape feels a little bad for boy who is chased up the tree, although that goes right over Harry's head).
In the movie, Harry breaks through and Snape loses control in his own head. I don't think Snape would ever do that (not that the moviegoer would ever care about that detail). If Harry can break through Snape's defenses and access the most protected memories--well, wouldn't Voldemort be able to do that, too?
And, I thought Snape's reaction was, of course, far too mild. But then, why should he get more upset than that. It's not like Harry really saw much of anything.
Re: Movie Wrongs!
Yes, thank you for mentioning this! I'd completely forgotten about that, but it was one of my pet peeves when the movie first came out. I remember thinking in the movie theater (I only just managed to restrain myself from actually shouting): "What the hell is wrong with Snape?! Why is he just standing there, and why doesn't he pull out his wand and try to Stupefy Lupin or something?!" Or if he'd lost his own wand after having been disarmed, then you're right, he'd grab one of the kids'.
I had high hopes for PoA, because I was really looking forward to the Shrieking Shack scene and the revelation of the Prank. After being so sorely disappointed, I've since lowered my standards to "if the movie doesn't completely suck, I guess I'll be okay with it". Of course that still didn't keep me from getting upset about the condensing of the SWM scene in OotP! ;-) But the movie wasn't a total loss, because I adore young Snape.
One tiny bit I loved in the movie SS: if you look closely, Snape's actually the one who knocks over Quirrell (in the scuffle to put out his robes), and at the end of the excitement there's an instant where you see an almost-smile of satisfaction on his face. And then he schools himself to be peeved at Gryffindor winning.
Ooh, thanks for pointing that out--I'll have to go watch SS again!
Re: Movie Wrongs!
In fact I am trying to think of what the movies do get right... his voice, maybe? although it's not quite what I hear. Age? Hair? Weight? Looks? General mannerisms? No, no, no, and no. AR's Snape could never freak out the way Snape does in the books. He's much too tightly controlled. When I imagine Snape while I'm reading, he's extremely thin, dirty, and creepy. He's supposed to be scary! On screen he is none of those things.
In the movies he is, as someone said above, a glorified extra. There is no mention that he's a spy. Occlumency is a joke - in the books, Snape never once mentions James or remarks on what he sees in Harry's memories. He praises Harry for breaking into his mind and only loses it when Harry looks into the Pensieve. The movies are disappointing altogether, but Occlumency was by far the most disappointing adaption. Despite the fact that Snape is the title character, I do not have much hope in the sixth movie being any good either. They will have a lot of explaining to do which they will probably ignore in order to make the Harry Potter comedy they want to make.
When I do watch the movies, I kind of just pretend that they're the Harry Potter series with some guy who looks vaguely like a much older version of Snape. :-/ It's really disappointing.
The age thing
But there's something a Japanese fan noted in her Snape discussion blog, which struck me as very true: When you imagine the ending of DH, a too-old Snape (and a too-old Lupin for that matter) will really take a lot away from the anguish of that death scene that we felt -- even if JKR might not have -- when reading that book. Snape is only 37 when he dies. 37!! Not to say that it's fine for him to die if he were Rickman's age, but it's just symbolic of the unfair life he has led, the visual that that scene represents. Here he is, bleeding to death, an unmarried man not even in his forties yet, clutching at a boy who's only twenty years younger, whose life, in turn, is subsequently to be described as way too young to be sacrificed (and, indeed, it turns out it isn't his time yet, since he ends up somehow magically surviving). That whole heart-breaking aspect of the scene will be weakened, unless both the actor and the movie crew manage to work some stunning movie trick.
And while the age thing couldn't have been helped, the physical disparity could have been ameliorated, I feel, if Rickman had only cared to go on a diet for the role. He knew perfectly well he'd be playing this role for years to come, and it's not like the other roles he's taken on in between the HP filmings have any of them depended on his physically being not-too-thin. Not to say he should have lost weight to an extent that might have jeopardized his health, but you know, I can't help but wish he put a wee bit less faith in his acting abilities covering up everything else. But then again, come to think of it, it's not like Snape's thinness has any consequential relevance to his character, so I suppose I'm just wishing too much out of a medium that's not supposed to replicated the books word for word in the first place.
The issue of age and weight notwithstanding, I still wouldn't wish anybody but Rickman to have been cast in the role. I feel he's got the sarcastic nuance and the general demeanor down pat. Also what I love about his interpretation of the character is this air of vulnerability. He looks like he's trying too hard, as a default state, even when he isn't. I recall someone mentioning, back when HBP had just come out, that Rickman's Snape has always sounded like a not-completely-accomplished RP accent. He talks sort of posh but it sounds forced. (Or they said; I'm from out of UK and a non-native speaker to boot, so I have *no* idea whether everybody would agree with that assessment) Which, considering his now-revealed childhood background, is totally in character. Both the possibility that he once had a regional accent, and the he would have "corrected" his speech very meticulously. (Especially so since, as I imagine, most regional accents wouldn't be replicated in the WW since there are so few wizards that live among the muggles, and fewer yet in a rural area. A Langcashire accent, for instance, would have been a dead giveaway of his half-blood status.)
Re: The age thing
He'd have had his 38th birthday about four months prior. Just to be pedantic. ;)
I agree though that they're going to have to work some kind of magic to make that come off well. And they had better cast a darn good young Severus for that "don't kill me!" scene which I just can't see them cutting since it's so primed to be movie-dramatic, what with the lightning lighting and blowing trees and all.
Re: The age thing
Right, but neither does Hermione's bushy hair, Hagrid's beard, Slughorn's mustache, Draco's pointy features, etc - but they're still important things about the characters: their looks. I think Rickman looks entirely wrong for the part.
Yes, Alan Rickman is the biggest luck of this entire saga – movie or books.