Things Every True Harry Potter Fan Will Have Noticed

Delving into the unexplained mysteries of the Harry Potter books that have niggled in the back of many a true fan’s mind.

J. K. Rowling has been the first to confess that in her depiction of the intricate, imaginary world of Harry Potter, she may have slipped up a few times with inaccuracies and inconsistencies in terms of plot, character and situation. In the seven-book series, there are mysteries and loose ends that have gone unsolved or unexplained, however trivial, that the dedicated reader will have pondered upon.

Where are the professors' families?
Do the teachers of Hogwarts have husbands, wives or families of their own? They all appear to be celibate, solitary and sacrificing their personal lives for the service of the school. Though, admittedly, picturing Snape or McGonagall in any kind of romantic scenario seems absurd.

Why do they celebrate Christmas at Hogwarts?
Is there a place in the magical world for Christianity or any religion for that matter? Can magic co-exist with different religions? It makes you wonder about the origins of the magical institutions in relation to religious ones.

Why is the magical world so eurocentric?
The Triwizard Tournament only involves three magical schools from Europe: Britain, France and an unnamed cold, northern European country. What about wizarding schools and magic in other countries and continents? And is Harry Potter’s name as well renowned in say, Jamaica, or Peru, as it is in Britain? A lot of the battles and histories of magic we learn about are centred in Europe. Perhaps there are other villains and heroes with their own stories in different parts of the world.

How possible is giantess-man love?
Hagrid, with feet the size of baby dolphins and hands the size of dustbin lids, is the son of a regular-sized wizard and a giantess. How on earth did his mother and father get it on, in practical terms? The size difference would have been huge as giants can grow up to 25 feet in height.

Map mishaps
Fred and George Weasley were the owners of the Marauder’s Map before they passed it on to Harry in aid of mischief making. Yet, if they had been devoted to learning the map’s passageways and happenings, how did they not see the name Peter Pettigrew labelled when Scabbers was with them? After all, he was also Percy’s pet rat before he was Ron’s so surely he would have been in a visible vicinity to the twins.

How clean is the boy who lived?
When and where does Harry wash? He almost always just gets straight out of bed and goes either down to breakfast or on some kind of mission. There is the prefect’s bathroom but there is no description of a Gryffindor dormitory bathroom. And when he starts experiencing adolescence where and when does he shave?

Doesn’t Hermione miss her parents?
She spends her term times at Hogwarts and many of the holidays with Ron, Harry and the Weasleys. Does Hermione ever actually see her mum and dad?

Does Harry keep certain abilities after Voldemort's downfall?
For instance, can Harry still speak Parseltongue after the piece of Voldemort that was in him has been destroyed?

Priori Incantatem inaccuracy
During the scene of Priori Incantatem in Goblet of Fire, Voldemort’s wand regurgitates its spells, with the most recent first. As they should have been revealed in reverse order to when they actually died, Lily should have erupted from the wand before James, as he died first. This is the opposite of how it is presented in the book.

Hogwarts birthdays
Why don’t we ever see a celebration of Ron or Hermione’s birthdays even though both days fall during term time at Hogwarts?


First published on ReadWave at www.readwave.com/katie.avis.riordan/

The Wolf of Wall Street: Review

Time to Tame Those Carnivorous Critics

Many reviewers rained down with negativity on Scorsese’s apparent avoidance of dealing with the moral issues that lie dormant at the centre of The Wolf of Wall Street. The suffering of the clients at the hands of the ego-maniacal Jordan Belfort and co. was simply neglected they exclaimed. Yet it is precisely this avoidance that makes this film, in fact, a more accurate portrayal of their self-indulgent trading lifestyle. The stock brokers living in their excessive, hedonistic bubble are oblivious to the harsh realities of the outside world and the anguish they have caused. Scorsese perfectly reflects this surreal, extraordinary and walled-in world where money, sex and drugs flow freely from the Wall Street tap.

With this said, the audience is invited to share in this sordid and exclusive existence and are, themselves, seduced and intoxicated by the vibrant, buzzing, electrifying debauchery. It is almost impossible not to be amused and greatly entertained by Leonardo DiCaprio and Jonah Hill’s antics and misadventures. There are so many laugh-out-loud moments that only serve to add to the audience’s complicity with, and pleasure of, this decadent vacuum of a film.

Verdict: It is funny, sexy, exhilarating, glitzy and glamorous. Yet there are darker and more sinister moments that cut through this façade, a juxtaposition that leaves the audience feeling rudely unsettled like in those cold, sharp moments of sobriety amidst a sea of drug-fuelled, escapist frenzy.

12 Years a Slave: A Matter of Colour

If you haven’t heard of Steve McQueen’s 12 Years a Slave by now you must have been living under a rock for the past few months. This film is the talk of the moment, with much buzz about the anticipation of success at the Oscars and the hope that McQueen will be the first black director to win the academy award. But what makes 12 Years stand out from the other high calibre films of the season? What is it about this film that has critics raving and audiences eagerly filling the seats of the nation’s cinemas?

This historical drama, based on a true life memoir, follows the journey of Solomon Northup, played beautifully by Chiwetel Ejiofor, a free black man kidnapped and sold into a life of slavery in 1840’s America. Along the way he encounters several memorable white plantation owners all with varying views and practices on the treatment of slaves. To name a few, Michael Fassbender’s sadistic and possessive character, Edwin Epps, disturbingly lingers in the mind long after the credits have rolled and Paul Dano’s John Tibeats embodies the petty cruelty and small-minded racism that plagued much of the Deep South in the duration of Solomon’s life and beyond. The beatings, torture, rape, lynching and degradation that the slaves experience are harrowingly depicted in this unflinching portrayal of the brutality and tragedy of a slave’s life. There is one scene in particular that seems to have been brandished on my mind. Without mentioning spoiler details, the scene was executed with such a steady, torturously long gaze at the barbaric ferocity of the slave’s abuse at the hands of the all-powerful master that many fellow cinemagoers and I could barely keep our hands from shielding our eyes. And it is precisely this honesty that sets the film apart; it is not afraid to deal with the most distressing situations and examine them under the full beam of spotlight.

One of the other outstanding aspects of 12 Years is how beautifully and artistically it is shot, making it easy to appreciate the director’s background as a visual artist (he won the Turner prize in 1999). There is a strong emphasis on the interplay between shadow, light and colour within the film. Some scenes are brimming with a heady mixture of close ups and colours creating a dizzying and almost overwhelming effect, heightening the chaotic and traumatic circumstances in which the protagonist finds himself. This accent on colour further highlights the key themes of the film, this fascination with a certain colour, a certain skin type. McQueen also often throws us into the majestic beauty of the natural environment in which Solomon is working, placing beauty and brutality side by side. The stunning, glowing red sunset filtering through the ancient trees almost an inverse reflection of the red welts ripped across naked black flesh. This powerful contrast accentuates the true devastation and tragedy of the story.

Slow-paced and thoughtful, the narrative focuses on the small details to great tragic effect like Solomon’s attempts at writing a letter with ink made from blackberry juice and his gift for playing the violin. In one particular scene, as he tunes the instrument, the tightening of the musical strings leaves us with the expectation of a snap; a fraught and unsettling atmosphere ensues in the place of something which should be joyous and merry. This disturbing juxtaposition is observed in several instances throughout the film where fun and danger, laughter and fear, merriment and anxiety lie side by side, and, like prey stalked by a crouching tiger, the slaves are under constant and imminent threat of violence and abuse. The cast are superb at highlighting this helplessness and sheer vulnerability, and convey how the sought after solidarity between each other was near impossible due to the torturous techniques and actions of their oppressors.

In addition to the great acting and creation from cast and crew, Hans Zimmer’s haunting musical score floats and weaves throughout the film, creating a subtle atmosphere of pathos, tragedy yet resilience. McQueen’s film is heart breaking, yet in many places uplifting and a true display of the rewards of courage, enduring love and the will not just to survive but to live, a testament to the human spirit. Watch this film and it is clear to see where those appraising critics are coming from!

Tom Hardy’s Neglected Character

When people talk about the English actor, Tom Hardy, the characters that most often come to mind are Bane, Batman’s mask-wearing arch-nemesis in The Dark Knight Rises (2012), or Charles Bronson, the notorious violent prisoner in Nicolas Winding Refn’s Bronson (2008). But a performance of Hardy’s that unduly slips under the radar is that of Stuart Shorter, a homeless alcoholic with a traumatic past, in the British TV movie, Stuart: A Life Backwards (2007). 

Alongside an ever adept Benedict Cumberbatch, Hardy touchingly and convincingly brings the character to life, through a striking mixture of vulnerability and aggression. Stuart is a complex and contradictory soul, gentle and softly spoken yet prone to violent outbursts. The performance allows the audience, simultaneously with Cumberbatch’s Alexander, to unwrap the rough, profanity-ridden exterior of the worn-skinned, lager-holding homeless man to find a sweet, funny and caring individual. Hardy’s Stuart mumbles and swears his way through this personal story with subtle intelligence and creativity, imparting intuitive ideas, and, though ravaged by drug and alcohol abuse, his mind seems sharply focussed on what he believes in and his principles. The catalogue of idiosyncrasies that Hardy portrays, like the omission of strange noises of surprise and pleasure, never come across as staged or artificial but real and natural. 

So this film is a must see for any Hardy fans out there. It is unpretentious, unsentimental yet terribly moving, heartfelt and gritty, and a story that brings both laughter and tears. And this neglected performance needs to be brought into the light.