Harry Potter

[GovernorSlaton]

Posted: 6/5/04 at 6:26pm

I saw it today, and I loved it. Mr. Cuaron's direction was fantastic! Your thoughts?

[Matt_G]

Posted: 6/5/04 at 6:32pm

I thought it was fantastic. His direction always amazes me and he outdid himself this time. Let's keep our fingers crossed he will do the fourth film, also.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 6/5/04 at 7:04pm

Mike Newell is directing the next one.

[mominator]

Posted: 6/5/04 at 7:33pm

Yep saw this at a 10:15 showing on Friday night. WOW!!! I will be seeing this one happily again. I just loved the angry young man and the teenage angst. It is so amazing to see how much these talented young folks have grown not just talet wise but physically as well.
B
Just a question who surprised you the most by their appearance? For me it was Neville!
B

[Chip1012]

Posted: 6/5/04 at 8:43pm

You all thought that? Really! My friend and I are big fans of the first 2 films and books and were HORRIFIED at what they did to this one. In one scene, Harry's scar was on his right side on his forehead, next it was left forehead. How could nobody in the production not catch that? The new Dumbeldore had absolutely NO magic, and why did they redesign the grounds of Hogwarts? Its one thing to not to follow the layout as described in the books, but to change it from the first 2 movies?! Hagrid's Hut was never on a mountain side like that. And what was with the Willy Wonka boat ride style Knight Bus? That laughing shrunken head would be sure to give anyone nightmares, why feel the need to add these stupid little things for a quick laugh.
I could go on and on... Updated On: 6/5/04 at 08:43 PM

[VoiceofReason]

Posted: 6/5/04 at 10:15pm

Though I am a fan of the books, I'm not quite that obsessive (not saying thats a bad thing, if you are), but my thought whenever a movie/musical/play is based on the book, is that when you first watch the new form of entertainment, watch it as an "inspired by" piece. I thought the film was the best of all the ones that have come out. I'm not a stickler for technical aspects of the film, and quite frankly, I'm not gonna waste time searching for mistakes when I can simply enjoy the movie, I thought that this movie stayed more true to the atmosphere of the Potter books than the past two films did. I also really enjoyed some of the more sarcastic/comical moments, and though noone compares to Richard Harris in many realms, I thought the new Dumbledore (forgive me for not knowing his name) did a spelndid job creating his own spin on Dumbledore instead of imitating Harris's. I also like that the new dumbledore caught onto more of the subtle humor in the character...

Overall, a really nice job done by all.

By the way-OMG have those kids grown up:
Look at this first:

http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/CFW/details.aspx?iid=2110314&print=true

Now>http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/CFW/details.aspx?iid=2110314&print=true>http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/CFW/details.aspx?iid=2110314&print=true

Now This:
http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/CFW/details.aspx?iid=50913021&print=true

always,
~m~>http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/CFW/details.aspx?iid=50913021&print=true>http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/CFW/details.aspx?iid=50913021&print=true

always,
~m~

[Chip1012]

Posted: 6/5/04 at 10:21pm

I'm not obsessive. I just didn't think it was well done. Like the end so rushed, they went to get Sirius up in the tower (and they said hes in the highest tower, yet there are higher ones around it!) and its all cut and choppy and not fluid. A lot of the scenes didn't feel complete.
And although Emma Thompson is a wonderful actress, she was very miscast.

[VoiceofReason]

Posted: 6/5/04 at 10:25pm

Oh! I don't mean YOU are obsessive, I just think that sometimes people need to take the films cum grano sal and try to enjoy the movie.
We'll have to agree to disagree about Emma Thompson; I thought she was splendid.
and Re: the rush at the end--I do agree there, but it was getting on in length, and I think with that restriction, they did a nice job.

ps-I hear that they are thinking of making the 4th one 4 hours long with an intermission of sorts...anyone else heard this?

~m~

[Matt_G]

Posted: 6/5/04 at 10:28pm

That will never happen. Studios will not back movies over 3 hours long anymore. Look at Kill Bill. Longer movies mean less showtimes during the day per theater and that means less money. You will never see a 4 hour long HARRY POTTER movie in the theater.

[GovernorSlaton]

Posted: 6/5/04 at 11:09pm

Malfoy got really tall and skinny, and my brother kept insisting that it was a different actor, so that physical change was the most obvious for me.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 6/6/04 at 12:04am

I think Goblet will likely be a two parter like Kill Bill (that's what some have suggested). I hope it will be. One of my problems with Azkaban is that too much was cut. I would HATE to see Goblet hacked--it's my fav of the five.

Otherwise (despite what I just said), I think they did a decent job cutting that huge book into a 2 1/2 film. (I would have preferred it longer). I think Cuaron did a great job--it was definitely more artistic than the first two. I think it is the best of the 3 films, but I do think it could be better.

[TheaterBaby]

Posted: 6/6/04 at 12:50am

I thought it was decent, but I certainly didn't like it as much as the first two. I agree that many scenes seemed to be rushed and choppy, and it seems like their were some cheap jokes and lines thrown in because someone wasn't being creative enough.
I was completely horrified by the cinemetography. Maggie Smith's character was completely underused; but then again I have not read the books, so I don't know if that character is just not in the third book as much as the first two?
I know it must be difficult to put in a different actor for someone who has passed away, and I think the new Dumbledore (sp?) has a very simialr look which works, but his voice is SO different that it bothered me.

The new scenery was shot in the hills of Scotland, which I think are beautiful. It didn't seem very obvious that it was different locations. It just appeared like it was a different angle or side of the castle and its grounds.

I did enjoy the personal growth of the characters. I love how much their personalities have changed. And I really enjoyed the outcome and twists in this movie. The main thing was, that even though I didn't read the book, I could tell their was a lot missing.
I saw the movie for the first time Thursday night and thoroughly enjoyed it. But I went to see it again today, basically because a friend wanted to and I didn't mind going again, I didn't like it as much for some reason. The first two movies I could watch over and over again and find new things. Not with this one.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 6/6/04 at 1:08am

I thought it was the best of the films so far but the worst translation of one the books. There were so many great things in the book missing from the film. Plus quite a few things went unexplained. It's sad that they are willing to sacrifice integrity over income, but that's the way the world works....

[TheaterBaby]

Posted: 6/6/04 at 1:19am

Well, I'll tell ya another thing I liked about the film and the characters...the film was much darker, which was very relevant to the storyline and characters. They're getting older now, and they are dealing with much more from the past, things that aren't necessarily pleasant to discover, and handeling situations in a much more adult fashion. I like that they don't dumb anyone down for age-stereotyping.

[son_of_a_gunn_25]

Posted: 6/6/04 at 1:43am

I havent seen it yet, but I have been in discussion about it with quite a few people. The general concensus I am getting is they loved the new darker style of the film, but the cutting of the subplots was very dissapointing to them. True it was a big book and they couldn't keep everything, but from what I've heard is other than the main story line just about everything was cut.

[nystateomind04]

Posted: 6/6/04 at 1:47am

i thought the second was a vast improvement on the first (which i really dont care for) so im hoping this one is a little darker and more honest and true to the book instead of watered-down for mainstreme appeal. but i guess that just doesnt always (or hardly ever) happen.

[GovernorSlaton]

Posted: 6/6/04 at 9:59am

"I think Goblet will likely be a two parter like Kill Bill (that's what some have suggested). I hope it will be. One of my problems with Azkaban is that too much was cut. I would HATE to see Goblet hacked--it's my fav of the five."

Alfonso Cuaron convinced the studio to shoot Goblet of Fire as one movie, and not two parts as was originally planned. Sorry.

[Wicked_Elphie]

Posted: 6/6/04 at 10:50am

I am a big fan of the books and prisoner of azkaban is my favorite of the books so I was really looking forward to this.

First of all I have to say that I enjoyed this film a lot more than the first. I realize that they can't include a lot of the sub plots since they can barely include everything that furthers the plot. They included what they could and I think that the new director did well. I enjoyed the performances by all the actors as well, I think they grow with each film. Oh and I have to agree that the kid playing Malfoy grew a lot, Tom something, I don't know but my younger sister is like in love with him lol! I took her and her friends to see it and they were gushing over him the whole time haha! I just didn't really see it but I guess he's cute!

Anyway, I was dissapointed at first but in terms of being an enjoyable movie experience it was. They can never top the books and I realize so I'm not like some of the crazy obsessed fans who are outraged.

One thing I didn't like though is that they didn't even finish the explanations at the end, for those who haven't read the book the whole part with the map isn't really explained and the background with Snape and all that but oh well, I think it works anyway.

Go see it and have fun!

[Wicked_Elphie]

Posted: 6/6/04 at 10:50am

I am a big fan of the books and prisoner of azkaban is my favorite of the books so I was really looking forward to this.

First of all I have to say that I enjoyed this film a lot more than the first. I realize that they can't include a lot of the sub plots since they can barely include everything that furthers the plot. They included what they could and I think that the new director did well. I enjoyed the performances by all the actors as well, I think they grow with each film. Oh and I have to agree that the kid playing Malfoy grew a lot, Tom something, I don't know but my younger sister is like in love with him lol! I took her and her friends to see it and they were gushing over him the whole time haha! I just didn't really see it but I guess he's cute!

Anyway, I was dissapointed at first but in terms of being an enjoyable movie experience it was. They can never top the books and I realize so I'm not like some of the crazy obsessed fans who are outraged.

One thing I didn't like though is that they didn't even finish the explanations at the end, for those who haven't read the book the whole part with the map isn't really explained and the background with Snape and all that but oh well, I think it works anyway.

Go see it and have fun!

[TheaterBaby]

Posted: 6/6/04 at 3:18pm

"but it's a nice multimedia addition to help less creative readers to visualize"

I think that's sort of a low blow at people's tastes and levels of intelligence. I for one have not read any of the Harry Potter books, and right now don't plan on doing so. That doesn't mean I don't read or am not as creative as those who do read those particular books. I happen to enjoy magic and wizard fiction when it is a movie, but I don't necessarily enjoy reading those kinds of books. The ones I do read are older classics such as A Tale of Two Cities or The Catcher In the Rye, or works by Shakespeare.

What your saying, basically, is that people who are too dumb to read the books will more likely enjoy the movies. But there are those of us who just don't choose to spend our time reading something we don't find that interesting. Less visualy creative? Not at all.

Updated On: 6/6/04 at 03:18 PM

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 6/6/04 at 3:54pm

TheatreBaby--that isn't what she meant. She meant that for those who read the Harry Potter books, the film will help the reader visualize that world more.

[~FloweryFriend~]

Posted: 6/6/04 at 11:32pm

Thanks for coming to my defense, jrb_actor.

TheatreBaby, I meant that the 3rd movie improves upon the book, but could not take the place of the book.

[Broadwaylilhead]

Posted: 6/7/04 at 1:47pm

I LOVED IT!

I'm kinda bummed about Goblet being done as one film- there is just TOO MUCH to cut out.

I liked his translation of the book and even enjoyed some of the small changes to minor story points.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 6/7/04 at 2:14pm

Alfonso Cuaron convinced the studio to shoot Goblet of Fire as one movie, and not two parts as was originally planned. Sorry.

As far as I am aware, the rumour about Goblet being a two parter only started in the wake of Kill Bill being cut in half and was never actually a fact. Also, why Cuaron convinced the studios to do anything when he isn't even attached to direct it is a mystery. And as good as Goblet is, it's not difficult to adapt it so it runs about as long as Chamber Of Secrets (165 minutes). The opening, for example, all you need to retain is the importance of the portkey and the scene with Dobby. And that's about 100 pages.

[Broadwaylilhead]

Posted: 6/7/04 at 2:34pm

Well, they are already on Week 2 of filming and its a one film deal. Then the debate is to keep the kids or replace them. I can not reinvest in all new actors. I think they will destroy the series if they replace the kids