I can't believe I'm starting this topic. I haven't even read the books. The movie seemed to have a lot going on -- I still prefer the third one the most. Fun visual stuff, really imaginative, as always. The relationship stuff was kind of a new twist.
Again, what an imagination J.K. Rowling has, if even a small part of what she has in the books is in the movie. I should probably read them sometime.
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
-
SonOfaRich
- Posts: 676
- Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 1:43 am
*SOME SPOILERS*
I saw it too and I had a lot of questions coming out of the theater. I asked my friend who reads the books and she says there was a lot of details they left out.
Such as:
- the backstory to Harry's dream.
- Why Crouch Jr. killed Crouch Sr.
- Why Neville felt so uncomfortable when Moody cursed the bug
- And why Harry did not blurt out Malfoy's dad was one of the death eaters.
My friend told me there was so much more that it sounded like they should have made this into a TV series instead of a movie. It's starting to feel sort of like Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
I saw it too and I had a lot of questions coming out of the theater. I asked my friend who reads the books and she says there was a lot of details they left out.
Such as:
- the backstory to Harry's dream.
- Why Crouch Jr. killed Crouch Sr.
- Why Neville felt so uncomfortable when Moody cursed the bug
- And why Harry did not blurt out Malfoy's dad was one of the death eaters.
My friend told me there was so much more that it sounded like they should have made this into a TV series instead of a movie. It's starting to feel sort of like Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
Intergalactic proton powered electrical tentacle advertising droids!!!!!
-
pinkpanther
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 7:10 pm
- Contact:
My friend who's read all the books was really satisfied with it, because he felt that everything they didn't explain was still evoked somehow. (I would have liked to have known that bit about Neville's parents though.)
And as someone who hasn't read the books, I liked it--I thought it was much more dramatic than the time travel plot of the last movie (which I also liked). The Death Eaters with their secret identities and acts of terrorism were a nice comment on modern times without being too heavy handed.
I also wondered why Harry didn't tell on that Malfoy guy, and why the otherwise protective teachers would allow the kids to compete in such a mortally dangerous contest! But it's more exciting that way I guess. I enjoyed that part where they explain that the Goblet of Fire creates a "binding magical contract"--it's fun to imagine that magic has its own appropriately draconian legal framework.
And as someone who hasn't read the books, I liked it--I thought it was much more dramatic than the time travel plot of the last movie (which I also liked). The Death Eaters with their secret identities and acts of terrorism were a nice comment on modern times without being too heavy handed.
I also wondered why Harry didn't tell on that Malfoy guy, and why the otherwise protective teachers would allow the kids to compete in such a mortally dangerous contest! But it's more exciting that way I guess. I enjoyed that part where they explain that the Goblet of Fire creates a "binding magical contract"--it's fun to imagine that magic has its own appropriately draconian legal framework.
-
jdalton
- Posts: 698
- Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 4:06 pm
- Location: 1 hr east of Vancouver (currently)
- Contact:
You've obviously never seen the wonderful British education system in operation. Ha-ha-ha! Sorry, couldn't resist.neil wrote:I also wondered why ... the otherwise protective teachers would allow the kids to compete in such a mortally dangerous contest!
Jonathon Dalton
A Mad Tea-Party
SPOILERS OMFG
Man, I loved it as a movie, but was similarily annoyed at everything that was left out. I'm wondering if he's just trying to piss off the poor sucker who has to fit the events of Book 5 into one movie. THAT's a lot of film on the editing room floor, lemme tell you.
But I can totally ignore that, for now. It'll come back and bite me, I know. But I actually loved it. I loved the anticlimax of it all; how Frank Bryce died, and it went HOLY SHIT KETTLE. Or then walking up Stoatshead Hill - amazing shot - and then OH MY boot? THAT kicked ass.
The rest was pretty good - plenty of humour, plenty of everything. There was one main thing I disliked; Voldemort's nose. Like, dayum. They took so many liberties with the plot, why'd they follow it to a T right there?
Man, I loved it as a movie, but was similarily annoyed at everything that was left out. I'm wondering if he's just trying to piss off the poor sucker who has to fit the events of Book 5 into one movie. THAT's a lot of film on the editing room floor, lemme tell you.
But I can totally ignore that, for now. It'll come back and bite me, I know. But I actually loved it. I loved the anticlimax of it all; how Frank Bryce died, and it went HOLY SHIT KETTLE. Or then walking up Stoatshead Hill - amazing shot - and then OH MY boot? THAT kicked ass.
The rest was pretty good - plenty of humour, plenty of everything. There was one main thing I disliked; Voldemort's nose. Like, dayum. They took so many liberties with the plot, why'd they follow it to a T right there?
Ralph Fiennes from this year alone can be seen as one of the most underrated actors of our time. From his character acting bit in Wallace and Gromit to his almost unrecognizable appearance as Voldemort (sure the nose really makes it hard) where he actually changes his voice a tad.
I haven't read any of the books either but I really enjoyed this one. It's great that all the set-up, that was necessary in the earlier films, are unneeded now and it just goes right into it.
I asked the same questions as you all did and I guess I have to read the book to gain more insight!
I personally also think the third film was better directed and a lot darker than this one, but I still enjoyed this a lot.
I guess the only things that are on my mind is Dumbledore. It's sad that Richard Harris passed away and Gambon is doing a very nice job filling in, but his version of the character is so different that it's hard for me to see if there's a reason for his acting different or if it's just a personal decision. To me, it's as if Dumbledore is a lot more grumpy and maybe losing his powers. Again, I haven't read the book but I wonder how Richard Harris would have performed it.
One last thing that I REALLY miss: John Williams' score. Patrick Doyle did a pretty good job providing background music but it really didn't drive the film like it does in the previous installments.
Overall, still a good film. I like it.
I haven't read any of the books either but I really enjoyed this one. It's great that all the set-up, that was necessary in the earlier films, are unneeded now and it just goes right into it.
I asked the same questions as you all did and I guess I have to read the book to gain more insight!
I personally also think the third film was better directed and a lot darker than this one, but I still enjoyed this a lot.
I guess the only things that are on my mind is Dumbledore. It's sad that Richard Harris passed away and Gambon is doing a very nice job filling in, but his version of the character is so different that it's hard for me to see if there's a reason for his acting different or if it's just a personal decision. To me, it's as if Dumbledore is a lot more grumpy and maybe losing his powers. Again, I haven't read the book but I wonder how Richard Harris would have performed it.
One last thing that I REALLY miss: John Williams' score. Patrick Doyle did a pretty good job providing background music but it really didn't drive the film like it does in the previous installments.
Overall, still a good film. I like it.
My name is Dave.
Yeah, Spoilers here too I guess.
This film seemed the darkest to me. I don't know how three could compete with the KKK-like Death Eaters and the death of two people, personally. Sure, the Azkaban guards (what they're called eludes me) were creepy, but the - no wait, THREE people died in this one. One of whom we'd grown close to throughout the movie, and he died as though he were nothing. I was amazed when I read the book that it had happened so fast.
I definitely think this was the best movie by far and have only today started seeing other criticism, and many people think this was not only not the best, but bad?
Watch the other ones again. I just watched all of the first three while doing a homework project all-nighter a week or two ago, and they're great, but the acting started out awful and slowly improved, and the pure emotional content of this one beats out the others hands down.
Also, the stuff they left out (while it was a lot) was hardly important to the overall plot and yeah I would have liked to have seen it but I don't mind. Rita Skeeter was in it enough to be annoying and that was fine, and the controversy about the house-elf that supposedly cast the dark mark was just unnecessary as far as the overall plot goes.
I want more! Book seven! Movie five! Let's go!
This film seemed the darkest to me. I don't know how three could compete with the KKK-like Death Eaters and the death of two people, personally. Sure, the Azkaban guards (what they're called eludes me) were creepy, but the - no wait, THREE people died in this one. One of whom we'd grown close to throughout the movie, and he died as though he were nothing. I was amazed when I read the book that it had happened so fast.
I definitely think this was the best movie by far and have only today started seeing other criticism, and many people think this was not only not the best, but bad?
Watch the other ones again. I just watched all of the first three while doing a homework project all-nighter a week or two ago, and they're great, but the acting started out awful and slowly improved, and the pure emotional content of this one beats out the others hands down.
Also, the stuff they left out (while it was a lot) was hardly important to the overall plot and yeah I would have liked to have seen it but I don't mind. Rita Skeeter was in it enough to be annoying and that was fine, and the controversy about the house-elf that supposedly cast the dark mark was just unnecessary as far as the overall plot goes.
I want more! Book seven! Movie five! Let's go!
From me blog:
Amy and I treated ourselves to a screening of the new Harry Potter film after she had finished her book(!) and I finished painting the bathroom. Having read (or listened) to the books, I really admire the very resourceful adaptation of the original source material into film form. Although it may have been nice to see a little more of the character development and the slower moments (The first act of the film feels a little like a psychedelic warp drive through the early exposition in the book), it was still good to see that the filmmakers and actors managed to retain much of the essence of the book by evoking so much with so little. In fact, it was almost asking too much of them to convey as much information as they were expected to get across in a film that is just over two hours long. So, good show. I liked it.
Amy and I treated ourselves to a screening of the new Harry Potter film after she had finished her book(!) and I finished painting the bathroom. Having read (or listened) to the books, I really admire the very resourceful adaptation of the original source material into film form. Although it may have been nice to see a little more of the character development and the slower moments (The first act of the film feels a little like a psychedelic warp drive through the early exposition in the book), it was still good to see that the filmmakers and actors managed to retain much of the essence of the book by evoking so much with so little. In fact, it was almost asking too much of them to convey as much information as they were expected to get across in a film that is just over two hours long. So, good show. I liked it.
I'd agree with that. They did have a lot of material to cover, though.Kazu wrote:From me blog:
The first act of the film feels a little like a psychedelic warp drive through the early exposition in the book
There may be spoilers, depending on what kind of things spoil movies for you:
I didn't like it nearly as much as the third movie. The sets seemed like pieces from a big-budget play, especially the graveyard.
I didn't see how someone who hadn't read the book could understand the movie. The girl I went with hadn't, and I had to explain a lot to her, feeling like a huge nerd. The next two movies are going to have to condense even more things, and really get to the essence of the books without killing them.
I'd think that running big decisions by JK Rowling wouldn't be a bad idea, but maybe the directors and stuff have their own visions. It just seems like since she would be available, and since changing Harry Potter is like rearranging the Bible in terms of number of people who will spot the changes, they could ask her what to remove to shorten it.
My $0.02.
SUPER SPOILER ALERT DO NOT READ IF YOU HAVEN"T SEEN THE MOVIE, OR READ THE FIFTH BOOK AND PLAN TO:
Cutting out almost all the contact with Sirius was a mistake. Since he has to die in the next one, they really needed to spend time in this movie showing a bond growing between him and Harry. The poor director for the fifth movie has to build up that relationship now to make Sirius's death mean something to viewers.
Not even mentioning Barty Jr's soul-ectomy was also a mistake, because the fact that he couldn't testify that he had done what he had done is a large part of the reason Harry is so moody and teen-angsty in the fifth book. That the larger wizard community doesn't have any proof that Voldemort is back is kind of a big deal in the fifth book. The fifth movie has a lot to explain from this movie and a whole lot to try to cover in the space of a feature film.
-
Josh Mauser
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 12:00 pm
- Location: Savannah
- Contact:
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests