From: bleablah@mume.invalid   
      
   Chan Welbourne explained on 7/16/2011 :   
   > VD pretended :   
   >> On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 14:35:52 -0400, Sirius Black wrote:   
      
   >>> On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 14:29:39 -0400, VD wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 02:06:22 -0700 (PDT), Benjamin Esham wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> * I felt much more nostalgic for the SS/PS days at the end of this movie   
   >>>>>   than I did at the end of the book. I think it's because the epilogue   
   >>>>> in   
   >>>>>   the book is given from Harry's perspective, and so we mostly see how   
   >>>>> he's   changed, while the movie still shows pretty much the same scene   
   >>>>> we had in   the very first movie. It's easy to mentally replace that   
   >>>>> long-haired kid   with 11-year-old Daniel Radcliffe--and not least   
   >>>>> because of the music!   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Did you notice how Harry put Albus and Rose on the train to Hogwarts   
   >>>> beginning again the sequence of the Albus "white" Rose (Rosicrucian)   
   >>>> initiation...the seekers journey?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Food for thought ;)   
   >>>   
   >>> There you go all Christian and religio on us. lol Bannister will have   
   >>> an atheistic hissy.   
      
   >> I am positive Mr. Bannister will be fine. ;>)   
      
   >> Following the alchemical structure isn't a Christian effort. It's a   
   >> liturgical one, the alchemical story can be allegorically ensnared in   
   >> any belief set as long as that set follows the seeker's   
   >> transfiguration of his soul.   
      
   >> It's not my fault Ms. Rowling is an ascribed Christian. ;)   
      
   > You can't miss the alchemical approach and yopu can't miss the film's use of   
   > sequences from the earlier films either. Nice cohesiveness, I enjoyed this.   
   > :oÞ   
      
   Oops, meat to symbolize a happy face. :/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)