A musical based on the series is currently being planned, tentatively scheduled for a 2008 run in London's West End. The Sunday Mirror reports that producers are hoping to have a "big-name composer" write the music. It has not yet been decided whether the production will tell the entire story, or focus on one particular subplot, though they do hope to include "spectacular flying scenes, live Quidditch and big showdowns with Voldemort".[114]
วันอังคารที่ 15 เมษายน พ.ศ. 2551
Theme park
On 31 May 2007 Warner Bros., Universal Studios and Leavesden Studios announced that a Harry Potter area will be built in Orlando, Florida at Universal Orlando's Islands of Adventure.[112] The announcement described "The Wizarding World of Harry Potter" as "the world's first immersive Harry Potter themed environment." According to the Warner Bros. press release, the section is "Expected to open in late 2009. The new environment will feature immersive rides and interactive attractions, as well as experimental shops and restaurants;."[113] In an online announcement it was revealed that plans have been in place for over a year and a half; with contributions from J.K. Rowling and Stuart Craig.[112]
Games
Electronic Arts has so far released seven video games movies based on the books and movies storylines, Philosopher's Stone,[105] Chamber of Secrets,[106] Prisoner of Azkaban,[107] Goblet of Fire,[108] and Order of the Phoenix[109][110] Lego Creator: Harry Potter[111] was another franchise EA had created, they however made only two games based on the first two books which were released to coincide with the release of the movies. EA also produced a Quidditch simulation game, Harry Potter: Quidditch World Cup, released in 2003.
Films
In 1999, Rowling sold the film rights to the first four Harry Potter books to Warner Bros. for a reported £1 million (US$1,982,900).[94] A demand Rowling made was that the principal cast be kept strictly British, nonetheless allowing for the inclusion of many Irish actors such as the late Richard Harris as Dumbledore, and for casting of French and Eastern European actors in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire where characters from the book are specified as such.[95] After considering many directors such as Steven Spielberg, Terry Gilliam, Jonathan Demme, and Alan Parker, on March 28, 2000, Chris Columbus was appointed as director for Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (titled "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" in the United States), with Warner Bros. citing his work on other family films such as Home Alone and Mrs. Doubtfire as influences for their decision.[96] After extensive casting,[97] filming began in October 2000 at Leavesden Studios and in London itself, with production ending in July 2001.[98] Philosopher's Stone was released on November 16, 2001.
Just three days after Philosopher's Stone's release, production for Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, also directed by Columbus, began, finishing in Summer 2002.[99] The film was released on November 15, 2002.
Chris Columbus declined to direct Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, only acting as producer. Mexican director Alfonso Cuarón took over the job, and after shooting in 2003, the film was released on June 4, 2004. Due to the fourth film beginning its production before the third's release, Mike Newell was chosen as the director for Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire,[100] released on November 18, 2005. Newell declined to direct the next movie, and British TV director David Yates was chosen for Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, which began production on January 2006,[101] and was released on July 11, 2007. Yates is confirmed to direct Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince,[102] for release on November 21, 2008.[8] In March 2008, Warner Bros. announced that the final instalment of the series, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, would be filmed in two segments, with part one released in November 2010 and part two released in May 2011. Yates would again return to direct both films.[103] The Harry Potter films were huge box office hits, with all five on the 50 highest-grossing films worldwide.[104]
Just three days after Philosopher's Stone's release, production for Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, also directed by Columbus, began, finishing in Summer 2002.[99] The film was released on November 15, 2002.
Chris Columbus declined to direct Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, only acting as producer. Mexican director Alfonso Cuarón took over the job, and after shooting in 2003, the film was released on June 4, 2004. Due to the fourth film beginning its production before the third's release, Mike Newell was chosen as the director for Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire,[100] released on November 18, 2005. Newell declined to direct the next movie, and British TV director David Yates was chosen for Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, which began production on January 2006,[101] and was released on July 11, 2007. Yates is confirmed to direct Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince,[102] for release on November 21, 2008.[8] In March 2008, Warner Bros. announced that the final instalment of the series, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, would be filmed in two segments, with part one released in November 2010 and part two released in May 2011. Yates would again return to direct both films.[103] The Harry Potter films were huge box office hits, with all five on the 50 highest-grossing films worldwide.[104]
Controversy
The books have been the subject of a number of legal proceedings, largely stemming either from claims by American Christian groups that the magic in the books promotes witchcraft among children, or from various conflicts over copyright and trademark infringements.
The books' immense popularity and high market value has led Rowling, her publishers, and film distributor Warner Bros. to take legal measures to protect their copyright, which have included banning the sale of Harry Potter imitations, targeting the owners of websites over the "Harry Potter" domain name, and suing author Nancy Stouffer to counter her accusations that Rowling had plagiarised her work.[87][88][89]
Various religious conservatives have claimed that the books promote witchcraft and are therefore unsuitable for children,[90] while a number of critics have criticised the books for promoting various political agendas.[91][92] Her revelation that the character Dumbledore was homosexual has increased the political controversies surrounding the series.[93]
The books' immense popularity and high market value has led Rowling, her publishers, and film distributor Warner Bros. to take legal measures to protect their copyright, which have included banning the sale of Harry Potter imitations, targeting the owners of websites over the "Harry Potter" domain name, and suing author Nancy Stouffer to counter her accusations that Rowling had plagiarised her work.[87][88][89]
Various religious conservatives have claimed that the books promote witchcraft and are therefore unsuitable for children,[90] while a number of critics have criticised the books for promoting various political agendas.[91][92] Her revelation that the character Dumbledore was homosexual has increased the political controversies surrounding the series.[93]
Literary critics
Early in its history, Harry Potter received overwhelmingly positive reviews, which helped the series to quickly grow a large readership. Upon its publication, the first volume, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, was greatly praised by most of Britain's major newspapers: the Mail on Sunday rated it as "the most imaginative debut since Roald Dahl"; a view echoed by the Sunday Times ("comparisons to Dahl are, this time, justified"), while The Guardian called it "a richly textured novel given lift-off by an inventive wit" and The Scotsman said it had "all the makings of a classic".[71]
By the time of the release of the fifth volume, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, the books began to receive strong criticism from a number of literary scholars. Yale professor, literary scholar and critic Harold Bloom raised pungent criticisms of the books' literary merits, saying, “Rowling's mind is so governed by clichés and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing."[72] A. S. Byatt authored a New York Times op-ed article calling Rowling's universe a “secondary world, made up of intelligently patchworked derivative motifs from all sorts of children's literature … written for people whose imaginative lives are confined to TV cartoons, and the exaggerated (more exciting, not threatening) mirror-worlds of soaps, reality TV and celebrity gossip".[73]
The critic Anthony Holden wrote in The Observer on his experience of judging Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban for the 1999 Whitbread Awards. His overall view of the series was very negative—"the Potter saga was essentially patronising, very conservative, highly derivative, dispiritingly nostalgic for a bygone Britain," and he speaks of "pedestrian, ungrammatical prose style.[74]"
By contrast, author Fay Weldon, while admitting that the series is "not what the poets hoped for," nevertheless goes on to say, "but this is not poetry, it is readable, saleable, everyday, useful prose".[75] The literary critic A.N. Wilson praised the Harry Potter series in 'The Times', stating: "There are not many writers who have JK’s Dickensian ability to make us turn the pages, to weep – openly, with tears splashing – and a few pages later to laugh, at invariably good jokes…We have lived through a decade in which we have followed the publication of the liveliest, funniest, scariest and most moving children’s stories ever written."[76] Charles Taylor of Salon.com, who is primarily a movie critic,[77] took issue with Byatt's criticisms in particular. While he conceded that she may have "a valid cultural point—a teeny one—about the impulses that drive us to reassuring pop trash and away from the troubling complexities of art", he rejected her claims that the series is lacking in serious literary merit and that it owes its success merely to the childhood reassurances it offers. Taylor stressed the progressively darker tone of the books, shown by the murder of a classmate and close friend and the psychological wounds and social isolation each causes. Taylor also pointed out that Philosopher's Stone, said to be the most lighthearted of the seven published books, disrupts the childhood reassurances that Byatt claims spur the series' success: the book opens with news of a double murder, for example.[78]
Stephen King called the series "a feat of which only a superior imagination is capable," and declared "Rowling's punning, one-eyebrow-cocked sense of humor" to be "remarkable." However, he wrote that despite the story being "a good one," he is "a little tired of discovering Harry at home with his horrible aunt and uncle," the formulaic beginning of all seven books.[36] King has also joked that "Rowling's never met an adverb she did not like!" He does however predict that Harry Potter "will indeed stand time's test and wind up on a shelf where only the best are kept; I think Harry will take his place with Alice, Huck, Frodo, and Dorothy and this is one series not just for the decade, but for the ages."[79] Orson Scott Card wrote a review of Deathly Hallows in which he said, "J.K. Rowling has created something that . . . deserves to last, to become a permanent classic of English literature, and not just as 'children's fiction.'"[80] Tina Jordan of Entertainment Weekly called Deathly Hallows "stunningly beautiful" and predicted that "these books are going to be on my grandchildren's shelves, and my great-grandchildren's, and maybe even further down the line than that."[81] A Telegraph review of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince and of the series as a whole, observed that Rowling's success was entirely self-made and not due to hype of her books by the publishing world, which has instead followed in her wake.[82]
The books have also spawned studies investigating the saga's literary merit. One collaboration by a number of critics is The Ivory Tower and Harry Potter. In this volume, Amanda Cockrell concludes, "Harry Potter is not the lightweight imitation of such serious high fantasy as A Wizard of Earthsea or The Lord of the Rings, but a legitimate descendant of the darker and more complicated school story," and suggests that "we need to take a deeper look into Harry Potter, who is deeper than we think."[83] She points to Rudyard Kipling, C.S. Lewis, Jill Murphy, Anthony Horowitz, Diana Wynne Jones, Thomas Hughes, Roald Dahl, and others as legitimate literary predecessors to the Harry Potter saga.[84] Lana A. Whithead, editor of the book, notes that Rowling "appears to be very seriously attempting a literary achievement."[85] John Granger, a conservative Orthodox Christian and English Literature professor at Peninsula College, writes that the "Harry Potter books are classics—and not just 'kid-lit' but as classics of world literature," and believes the books carry a "mother-lode" of deeper literary and symbolic meaning than meets the eye.[86]
By the time of the release of the fifth volume, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, the books began to receive strong criticism from a number of literary scholars. Yale professor, literary scholar and critic Harold Bloom raised pungent criticisms of the books' literary merits, saying, “Rowling's mind is so governed by clichés and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing."[72] A. S. Byatt authored a New York Times op-ed article calling Rowling's universe a “secondary world, made up of intelligently patchworked derivative motifs from all sorts of children's literature … written for people whose imaginative lives are confined to TV cartoons, and the exaggerated (more exciting, not threatening) mirror-worlds of soaps, reality TV and celebrity gossip".[73]
The critic Anthony Holden wrote in The Observer on his experience of judging Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban for the 1999 Whitbread Awards. His overall view of the series was very negative—"the Potter saga was essentially patronising, very conservative, highly derivative, dispiritingly nostalgic for a bygone Britain," and he speaks of "pedestrian, ungrammatical prose style.[74]"
By contrast, author Fay Weldon, while admitting that the series is "not what the poets hoped for," nevertheless goes on to say, "but this is not poetry, it is readable, saleable, everyday, useful prose".[75] The literary critic A.N. Wilson praised the Harry Potter series in 'The Times', stating: "There are not many writers who have JK’s Dickensian ability to make us turn the pages, to weep – openly, with tears splashing – and a few pages later to laugh, at invariably good jokes…We have lived through a decade in which we have followed the publication of the liveliest, funniest, scariest and most moving children’s stories ever written."[76] Charles Taylor of Salon.com, who is primarily a movie critic,[77] took issue with Byatt's criticisms in particular. While he conceded that she may have "a valid cultural point—a teeny one—about the impulses that drive us to reassuring pop trash and away from the troubling complexities of art", he rejected her claims that the series is lacking in serious literary merit and that it owes its success merely to the childhood reassurances it offers. Taylor stressed the progressively darker tone of the books, shown by the murder of a classmate and close friend and the psychological wounds and social isolation each causes. Taylor also pointed out that Philosopher's Stone, said to be the most lighthearted of the seven published books, disrupts the childhood reassurances that Byatt claims spur the series' success: the book opens with news of a double murder, for example.[78]
Stephen King called the series "a feat of which only a superior imagination is capable," and declared "Rowling's punning, one-eyebrow-cocked sense of humor" to be "remarkable." However, he wrote that despite the story being "a good one," he is "a little tired of discovering Harry at home with his horrible aunt and uncle," the formulaic beginning of all seven books.[36] King has also joked that "Rowling's never met an adverb she did not like!" He does however predict that Harry Potter "will indeed stand time's test and wind up on a shelf where only the best are kept; I think Harry will take his place with Alice, Huck, Frodo, and Dorothy and this is one series not just for the decade, but for the ages."[79] Orson Scott Card wrote a review of Deathly Hallows in which he said, "J.K. Rowling has created something that . . . deserves to last, to become a permanent classic of English literature, and not just as 'children's fiction.'"[80] Tina Jordan of Entertainment Weekly called Deathly Hallows "stunningly beautiful" and predicted that "these books are going to be on my grandchildren's shelves, and my great-grandchildren's, and maybe even further down the line than that."[81] A Telegraph review of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince and of the series as a whole, observed that Rowling's success was entirely self-made and not due to hype of her books by the publishing world, which has instead followed in her wake.[82]
The books have also spawned studies investigating the saga's literary merit. One collaboration by a number of critics is The Ivory Tower and Harry Potter. In this volume, Amanda Cockrell concludes, "Harry Potter is not the lightweight imitation of such serious high fantasy as A Wizard of Earthsea or The Lord of the Rings, but a legitimate descendant of the darker and more complicated school story," and suggests that "we need to take a deeper look into Harry Potter, who is deeper than we think."[83] She points to Rudyard Kipling, C.S. Lewis, Jill Murphy, Anthony Horowitz, Diana Wynne Jones, Thomas Hughes, Roald Dahl, and others as legitimate literary predecessors to the Harry Potter saga.[84] Lana A. Whithead, editor of the book, notes that Rowling "appears to be very seriously attempting a literary achievement."[85] John Granger, a conservative Orthodox Christian and English Literature professor at Peninsula College, writes that the "Harry Potter books are classics—and not just 'kid-lit' but as classics of world literature," and believes the books carry a "mother-lode" of deeper literary and symbolic meaning than meets the eye.[86]
Commercial success
In November 2007, the magazine Advertising Age estimated the total value of the Harry Potter brand at roughly $15 billion (£7 billion).[9] The popularity of the Harry Potter series has translated into substantial financial success for Rowling, her publishers, and other Harry Potter related license holders. This success has made Rowling the first and thus far only billionaire author.[56] The books have sold over 325 million copies worldwide and have also given rise to the popular film adaptations produced by Warner Bros., all of which have been successful in their own right with the first, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, ranking number four on the inflation-unadjusted list of all-time highest grossing films and the other four Harry Potter films each ranking in the top 20.[57] The films have in turn spawned five video games and have in conjunction with them led to the licensing of over 400 additional Harry Potter products (including an iPod) that have, as of July 2005, made the Harry Potter brand worth an estimated 4 billion US dollars and J.K. Rowling a US dollar billionaire,[58] making her, by some reports, richer than Queen Elizabeth II, however, Rowling has stated that this is false.[59][60]
On 12 April 2007, Barnes & Noble declared that Deathly Hallows has broken its pre-order record, with over 500,000 copies pre-ordered through its site.[61]
A Maine bookseller said she had to sign a legal form stating that she would not open the boxes of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince until their official release date at midnight, and that she would cover the boxes with blankets in her back room so they would not be seen.[62] For the release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, extra security was added by limiting the number of librarians who handle the book prior to its release. Those who failed to comply with the written agreement, which employees were required to sign, would jeopardise those libraries' access to "future embargoed titles."[63] Prior to the release of Deathly Hallows, the BBC reported that some booksellers and libraries may have been tempted to break the embargo for publicity, as there were no future Potter books to be banned from selling.[64]
For the release of Goblet of Fire, 9000 FedEx trucks were used with no other purpose than to deliver the book.[65] Together, Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble pre-sold more than 700,000 copies of the book.[65] In the United States, the book's initial printing run was 3.8 million copies.[65] This record statistic was broken by Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, with 8.5 million, which was then shattered by Half-Blood Prince with 10.8 million copies.[66] 6.9 million copies of Prince were sold in the U.S. within the first 24 hours of its release; in the United Kingdom more than two million copies were sold on the first day.[67] The initial print run for Deathly Hallows was 12 million copies, and over a million were pre-ordered through Amazon and Barnes & Noble.[68][69]
Others have claimed that sales of the Harry Potter books have not been highly profitable for book retailers. Intense competition to offer the best price on the popular novels has whittled away expected revenue. The suggested retail for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows was $35 but Amazon.com offered the book at a discounted price of $18, with other major chains following suit to remain competitive. Some hope that the frenzy associated with the book will create sales of other items when customers are drawn to bookstores. Other small, independent sellers have tried to protect revenues necessary to keep them in business by selling the book at the suggested cover price but offering other "add-on" items like Potter memorabilia or coupons towards other purchases.[70]
On 12 April 2007, Barnes & Noble declared that Deathly Hallows has broken its pre-order record, with over 500,000 copies pre-ordered through its site.[61]
A Maine bookseller said she had to sign a legal form stating that she would not open the boxes of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince until their official release date at midnight, and that she would cover the boxes with blankets in her back room so they would not be seen.[62] For the release of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, extra security was added by limiting the number of librarians who handle the book prior to its release. Those who failed to comply with the written agreement, which employees were required to sign, would jeopardise those libraries' access to "future embargoed titles."[63] Prior to the release of Deathly Hallows, the BBC reported that some booksellers and libraries may have been tempted to break the embargo for publicity, as there were no future Potter books to be banned from selling.[64]
For the release of Goblet of Fire, 9000 FedEx trucks were used with no other purpose than to deliver the book.[65] Together, Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble pre-sold more than 700,000 copies of the book.[65] In the United States, the book's initial printing run was 3.8 million copies.[65] This record statistic was broken by Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, with 8.5 million, which was then shattered by Half-Blood Prince with 10.8 million copies.[66] 6.9 million copies of Prince were sold in the U.S. within the first 24 hours of its release; in the United Kingdom more than two million copies were sold on the first day.[67] The initial print run for Deathly Hallows was 12 million copies, and over a million were pre-ordered through Amazon and Barnes & Noble.[68][69]
Others have claimed that sales of the Harry Potter books have not been highly profitable for book retailers. Intense competition to offer the best price on the popular novels has whittled away expected revenue. The suggested retail for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows was $35 but Amazon.com offered the book at a discounted price of $18, with other major chains following suit to remain competitive. Some hope that the frenzy associated with the book will create sales of other items when customers are drawn to bookstores. Other small, independent sellers have tried to protect revenues necessary to keep them in business by selling the book at the suggested cover price but offering other "add-on" items like Potter memorabilia or coupons towards other purchases.[70]
สมัครสมาชิก:
บทความ (Atom)
