You can trade Muggle money for wizard at Gringotts. And i bet being a wizard helps the H@><0r5 get into bank accounts, w00t w00t!
Viagra. Isn’t that supposed to be magical?
astorian hit the nail on the head for me. Couldn’t have said it better myself.
Which puts me in mind of the fact that, here in Europe, there are two versions of the paperback editions of the book. One is the regular version, with happy drawings of Harry et al och the cover (he looks like that wheres wally plonker, much prefer the Swedish cover artwork, thats lovely!). Then there is also the “adult edition”, very nice black paperbacks with interesting coverart (not featuring any baby-mages) in b/w.
How about having two versions of the films too? A C.C. style literal translation for the kiddies (and others who happened to enjoy it), and a slightly different take for the grown up fans. Perhaps a different director taking on each book for the adults or something, could be really interesting to compare say Gilliams version with say Burtons or Bessons. Hmm not the best examples but its very early in the morning, you know what I mean…
Oooh, I would have loved to see Gilliam’s take on it. Honestly, almost any director would have been better than Columbus–who’s a hack at best. One wouldn’t think that a movie about magic and mayhem could be as deadly boring as Columbus’s The Sorcerer’s Stone. I was so disappointed. I enjoyed most of the adult actors, particularly Snape, but none of the children did anything for me. I was particularly dismayed with Hermione. Hermione is supposed to be an awkward ugly duckling, not a pretty little brat! And I was crushed that they left out Dumbledore’s rendition of the school song.