One of the most debated question is always whether a movie adaptation will live up to its source book. I find this a singularly silly question as the two are too (sic) different for any objective comparison. After all, a movie can show in seconds a scene it might take an author 3 paragraphs or 3 pages (go read a Clancy) to build up. While a book is never constricted by the 3 hour format (go watch Zodiac!) and can ramble on for 12 volumes (go read Wheel of Time!). I guess the other reason I find this a silly question also because I can never make up my mind. I always find a movie unable to live up to its book - but LOTR is my favourite exception to this rule and so its much easier to rubbish the question!
But that's not the point - HARRY POTTER!
First I watched the movie - OoTP - Order of the Phoenix for the un-Pottered people. Disappointment galore but it was to be expected I guess since this was my least favourite book. But was it my imagination or did every seem to be a little too calm.. I mean - hello, Dark Wizard loose! Harry seemed a little distracted... But the Department of Mysteries scene was fabulous.. The never-ending walls of prophecies! The Voldy-Dumby battle!! This is where a movie scores...
Then I waited and waited for the last book. Unlike some insane people (PP and I!), I didn't pre-book and arrive at the shop at 5:30 am! I did stick to tradition and get my brother to buy it for me. I was in office when it arrived and I grabbed it and went striaght home to read it in about 4 hours - man I'm losing my touch! No real surprises in the book but JK Rowling has neatly ties up all loose ends and if one of the last chapters resembles a scene from The Matrix, we won't dwell on it!