They have condensed the regular Sorcerer’s Stone and the secret Sorcerer’s Stone.

I really like the editor’s note.

Why does it have two titles? Really, I want to know. They call it the sorcerer’s stone throughout the book, I think too, don’t they?

^^Thank you. So, in the British/Australian book, do they always refer to it as the Philosopher’s Stone (it just seems like a lot of editing to change every mention in the American version just so that we wouldn’t be confused)? They said Sorcerer’s Stone in the movie though, right?

It’s incredibly stupid because ‘sorcerer’ isn’t even used as a title for the magical people. ‘Philosopher’s Stone’ makes a million times more sense and even if the word ‘philosopher’ has a different meaning today, the philosopher’s stone is a very well known myth. Anyone could make the connection.

I think the movie called it philosopher’s as well. Yes, I definitely remember the trio’s whiny voices yelling “we know about the philosopher’s stone!” at the old scottish woman.

I remembered the same whiny voices screaming about the sorcerer’s stone. They should’ve just called it philosopher’s in America too. It would’ve saved them a lot of trouble.

^^I think it’s whatever you’re used to saying. I wonder if they dubbed in sorcerer’s stone every time in the movie or if they just shot those scenes twice.

It seems like they shot the scenes twice, because the lips presumably line up with the words in each shot. If it were dubbed in, there’d be a noticeable gap or ‘wrong-ness’, even if very small. Enough to fall into the uncanny valley, anyway.

It’s part of why I prefer subtitles over dubbing with foreign films. I might not understand the adible words, but at least the lips synch up properly.

My friend used to have the British AND American version of every single book.

I need subtitles even for English movies. It’s easier to keep track of the dialogue.

Really? Thought ‘dialogue’ and ‘dialog’ are just alternate spellings.

According to Wikipedia, they’re interchangeable.

So, when Neville, in the fifth book, is in the Three Broomsticks at the first DA meeting and says “He even saved the Sorcerous-” To which Hermione says “Sorcerer’s-”, what does he mess up in the British version?

But dialogue is correcter.

That’s the one I learned.

Regarding the Philosopher’s vs. Sorcerer’s thing, it’s like how Spooks is called MI5 when it’s marketed in the US.

Why do you reckon they changed it?

“Americans are retarded. Let’s butcher this book.”

“Americans are violent. Let’s edit this boxart and make Kirby look ‘badass’.”

“Americans are extremely retarded. Let’s edit this comedy show and add a laugh machine so they know when a joke is made.”

Because, as is well documented, America is a land made up entirely of incestual rednecks.

I thought that was Tasmania.

Apologies, there was cousin sex in my family history.

I think the only time laugh tracks can be funny is if they’re intentionally mocked, like in Rowan Atkinson’s Canned Laugher.

Look it up on youtube, it’s awesome but only uploaded in three parts.

I hate laugh tracks. I hate it especially when they laugh at the stupidest things, that aren’t even funny.

In fact, the only show that I like with a laugh track is Sabrina, the Teenaged Witch.

I hate shows that play laugh tracks after practically every single spoken word or action. Some shows don’t do this, thankfully.

Well, maybe we could save some quality stuff,

And the animated films from the nineties!

...after we burn Disney, could we please at least try to return it into its former glory?

^{because I will miss it. The little kid in me who watched those movies hundreds of times will miss it.}

Yayyy!

Heh heh.

The Republic of Disney should have one hour called “The Pain Hour: Because Some of Us Are Masochistic and Want to Snark” and play episodes of the Jonas Brothers’ show.

It does that to you. I like some of the musical numbers, but I hate the very idea of it.

Hey. Gabriella is pretty. She can’t be a nerd. She falls under geek chic.

Hey. Gabriella is pretty. She can’t be a nerd. She falls under geek chic.

Her being a “math genius” evidently consists of being able to count and add.

>:|

nitpicking

Couldn’t they have made her do something actually hard? I mean, none of the target audience would figure it out anyway, but it would help the few people who Know What They’re Talking About to not kill themselves afterward…

Appaaarently not.

Probably because no one working on the set actually KNEW ENOUGH OF ANYTHING TO WRITE IT ON THE BOARD.

cough

That would end up becoming a division of TV Tropes, people would be sucked into that just as much, and end result? People still know you have no idea what you’re talking about.

Also, fyi: I didn’t care about HSM enough to watch it so closely that I could read their chalkboard.

Also, fyi: I didn’t care about HSM enough to watch it so closely that I could read their chalkboard.

<<
>>

SHUSH

STOP MAKING ME FEEL LIKE I HAVE NO LIFE

Not that I do. Hmm.

But…but…the chemistry. They butchered it. D:

I just watched HSM.

I hate myself.

It’s OK. I watch it to ship Ryan and Kelsi (and one or two of the songs are OK). You’re not alone.

But they failed sooooooo baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaadly at trying to establish any sort of nerd cred for Gabriella. Gaaah.

THANK YOU! I am not the only one who realized that! YAY! They actually failed at making the geeks geeky, period. If you watch “Stick to the Status Quo,” you’ll see that the geek table is populated by models in argyle. Occasionally, pink argyle. “Hey, kids! You, too, can be smart! Just wear argyle!” UUURRRGGHHH!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, HSM is, like Twilight and Eragon, one of those things so badly written that the minor characters are more interesting than the main ones. Hell, the villains are more interesting. A kindergartner is more interesting. Oh, wait.

Hahaha! Thanks for that Nate. :D

How did you go from Harry Potter to High School Musical?

No idea.

Americans butchering books because of retardation—>laugh tracks —> Hannah Montana —> Disney —> Republic of Disney —> Jonas Brothers —> HSM.

Aw man, Ryan is my favourite.

Mine, too! And Kelsi is my favorite girl character (everyone else fails at nerdiness, except Sharpay, and Sharpay is a bitch.)

Ick. I’m 16 and I don’t see any attraction in Zac Efron whatsoever. He looks like a little BOY!

Now, Chris Pine, on the other hand, is a STUD.

SWITCHING CLOTHES!

I only figured that out much later, but there’s a line in that song that says “I’ll show you how I swing.” If you’ve ever heard the phrase “I don’t swing that way” or “I swing both ways”, then… yeah. Also, teams? If you’ve ever heard about “switching teams” or “going to the other side”... I’m a terrible person when it comes to innuendo and subtext.

^{Aw, man, do I suck because I rooted/root for Sharpay?}

I like villains.

_{I used to like Rosalie.}

Eh, I’m beginning to think that I usually find the villains in anything more appealing (character wise, etc.).

I remember a rather disgusting one where she was goth, drew manga, and was terribly unpopular, since that popular chick Gabriella ran the school… shudders

...ewrgh…

I agree. While I don’t write fanfiction, if I read any, the characters should be in character. And that wasn’t. That isn’t at all in character. I don’t get it when fanfiction writers write “OOC*” along with their summaries. Doesn’t that slightly ruin the point?

*Out of character

They want to control the characters

I think I knew about that, but I didn’t really read any fanfics where it worked. They usually Flanderized some characters, completely interpreted them in a way that made no sense, etc. But I get what you mean. Thanks (?).