harry potter was pretty damn good

[MrScott81]

I thought they cut too much out of the book....after I watched this yesterday I started skimming through the book and found myself thinking "that wasn't in there, neither was that"...etc.

I think they focused too much on special effects, and didn't focus enough on character and relationship development (although they did kind of hint more about Ron + Hermoine). Percy is basically non-existent in the movie, whereas he played a more significant role in the book, which established his role for book 4. They also cut out a few parts regarding Black.

Overall I think the movie was good, but could have been done better. Maybe the old director was a better choice

I have no idea how they're going to do book 4 and 5 in a two or three hour span. I'm really looking forward to Goblet of Fire though
Maybe they should split those up into 2 movies?

 

[spacejamz]

Originally posted by: Modeps

Originally posted by: spacejamz
how did Lindsay...I mean Hermione look?

Dude, she's like 13. :disgust:

it was joke dude...did you even see the skit on SNL?

 

[Modeps]

Originally posted by: spacejamz

Originally posted by: Modeps

Originally posted by: spacejamz
how did Lindsay...I mean Hermione look?

Dude, she's like 13. :disgust:

it was joke dude...did you even see the skit on SNL?

I havent watched SNL for like... I dunno, 5 or 6 years

 

[spacejamz]

Originally posted by: Modeps

Originally posted by: spacejamz

Originally posted by: Modeps

Originally posted by: spacejamz
how did Lindsay...I mean Hermione look?

Dude, she's like 13. :disgust:

it was joke dude...did you even see the skit on SNL?

I havent watched SNL for like... I dunno, 5 or 6 years

not sure if the link in this thread still works or not...


Lindsay Lohan as Hermione

 

[tennisflip]

Haven't read the books, but do Hermione and the Weasley kid end up together? There were lots of innuendos in the film.

 

[Redviffer]

Was good: worth going opening day.

 

[MrScott81]

Originally posted by: tennisflip
Haven't read the books, but do Hermione and the Weasley kid end up together? There were lots of innuendos in the film.

not yet....could happen in book 6 or later.

 

[Beller0ph1]

That movie was the best of all of them. Though it is the first one I saw in the theaters, the others I missed so had to watch them on DVD. The entire movie was a little darker than the others, less happy, more scary. The dementors I thought would scare the bejezzus out of all the little kids in the theaters. However, I still liked they way they showed the passage of time, and I thought the guy that played prof. Lupin was perfect for the part. Very well done.

 

[MrScott81]

I still think they ddin't develop the characters enough, as well as not explaining the story very well.

hermoine doesn't show off her "skillz" enough, and alot of stuff wasn't menitoned about the castle being guarded by spells and other witchcraft which becomes important in later books.

also the minister of magic was pretty much non-existant in the movie. He plays a big role in future books too.

I guess they did the best they could though.

 

[Stark]

it was pretty good.
hogwarts seemed like a different place in this one vs the other movies.
they also didn't build much drama before sirious black's true intent was revealed.
And they never made the link between harrys dad and prongs.
and the old dumbledore seemed more like the character in the book.

the visuals and the clock references throughout were pretty cool (but i don't remember a huge pendulum at the front door of hogwarts in the books or movies).
buckbeak was cool.
malfoy seemed like a little girl in this one more than a bully/antagonist.

for the next two they're going to have to do it like lotr... theatrical version and extended dvd version. or split them up into multiple movies.

 

[anxi80]

watching it this weekend, but out of curiosity, would you guys agree with the general consensus... that alfonso cuarón > chris columbus in terms of the potter movies ??

 

[Ikonomi]

I agree with a lot of what you guys are saying. They left out a lot from the book... a whole lot. I was absolutely baffled that they left out the entire development of James Potter and his friends. I mean, that's huge. That's enormous. And they left it out.

A lot of scenes, especially in the beginning, seemed like they were there just for "cool" value, and not plot value. Many times, I felt like the movie was just going through the motions of the book, without the events adding anything to the plot. If I hadn't read the book, it kind of seems like a lot of it would have been really incoherent. Things that were important in the book were completely absent or inadequately explained, besides James Potter. Pensieve, anyone? Percy Weasley? Quidditch? The Firebolt (though I'm glad it sneaked in at the last minute)? The revelations of Snape's relationship to Harry? I wish the movie had showed more lessons, because the classes in book three were really cool.

The characters didn't develop in the movie, which is really disappointing. It felt like a middle movie. You know, like the second in a series that's just a bridge between the beginning and the conclusion.

As a matter of personal preference, the characters introduced just weren't as I read them in the books. Sirius never showed his irreverent side. Lupin's moustache was creepy. :Q Crookshanks and Scabbers were too minor! And then there was Snuffles vs. Lupin... that's not how it went at all. Sirius chose that form partly because he could keep were-Lupin in check, along with James. But in the movie, he got his ass beat.

I really don't know what's going to happen with movie four, let alone five. I don't understand at all how they're going to resolve the histories of James/Sirius/Remus/Peter/Snape/Lily.

Oh, and Snape asking the class to identify a werewolf as compared to an animagus was really forced. The way Lupin's secret came out was so elegantly written, as was the discovery of the three animagi. But the movie just lumped them together and put everything out in the open.

 

[Adul]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Ikonomi
Can you make this the ***OFFICIAL*** and/or ***CONFIRMED*** HPoA thread by any chance?

Anyway, the movie was okay. I think I would have liked it better if I wasn't such a fan of the books. I can totally understand that they had to leave a lot out for brevity (the book is too convoluted to transcribe into a 1.5 hour production), but I really feel like the spirit of the book was lost. But that's just me.

Oh, and I did not like the Jamaican shrunken head on the Knight Bus. Boo-urns. BOO-URNS.

the shrunken heads were awesome!

I enjoyed it. Now where can I get a talking head

 

[Stark]

Originally posted by: anxi80
watching it this weekend, but out of curiosity, would you guys agree with the general consensus... that alfonso cuarón > chris columbus in terms of the potter movies ??

i think the new guy did a good job. none of the kids are great actors and he was able to use lots of visual shots to convey the characters moods (vs having them act it out). There was no way to tell the whole story, and i think he did a good job of making something both book readers and newbies would enjoy.

 

[anxi80]

cool, thanks for the insight! appreciate it!

 

[Ikonomi]

Originally posted by: Stark

Originally posted by: anxi80
watching it this weekend, but out of curiosity, would you guys agree with the general consensus... that alfonso cuarón > chris columbus in terms of the potter movies ??

i think the new guy did a good job. none of the kids are great actors and he was able to use lots of visual shots to convey the characters moods (vs having them act it out). There was no way to tell the whole story, and i think he did a good job of making something both book readers and newbies would enjoy.

Yeah, I do agree with that. There was some really expressive cinematography, which I thought was very cool.

 

[z0mb13]

just got back from seeing this!

overall its A GREAT MOVIE!! its definitely one of the best movies I have seen so far this year

also yeah, hermione is HAWTT!!! definitely jailbait material!!

 

[shopbruin]

allright, as a huge fan of the books, overall it was a LOT BETTER than the first two movies. those two were good, but this one just had a better flow.

my main beefs comes from them NOT explaining who moony, prongs, padfoot and wormtail were! how can you not explain it?! they drew the damn map, at least lupin could have mentioned that!

also no explanation of the animagi... none at all..

i thought the time references were good though. and i really enjoy this dumbledore.

AND THEY DID NOT EXPLAIN THE IMPORTANCE OF HARRY'S PATRONUS.

otherwise from these plot holes which might come back to bite them in the ass in future movies, it was good. i was DELIGHTED that fred and george FINALLY got some screen time. unfortunately percy has none, which is going to be hell to portray in book 5. sigh.

 

[OutHouse]

I thought that the movie itself while good, did not stay with the book. There was a lot that had been left out. For instance, the book talks about how Harry overhears an argument between Mr. and Mrs. Weasley about whether or not they should "tell Harry". Then, the next morning, Arthur Weasley pulls Harry aside to tell him that Sirius Black is after him. However, the book does not even imply that the Weasley's even knew the fact that Sirius Black is Harry's godfather. The movie also left out another scene where Sirius not only breaks into the castle, but gets into the Gryffindor tower. And, the movie completely left out Sir Cadogan took the place of the Fat Lady while she was being repaired (thereby causing the situation that let Sirius into the tower). I was also disappointed that they didn't follow the book in the fact that it was Crookshanks who let Harry and Hermione into the passage under the whomping willow.

I also didnt like how they changed the total landscaping of Hogwarts. Oh and also all the references to time in the movie referencing the Time Turner that Hermione was using was pretty cool.

Those are just the items that I can think of off the top of my head. So while it was a good movie, I was disappointed about how much it was just a good movie and did not follow the book.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: MrScott81
I thought they cut too much out of the book....after I watched this yesterday I started skimming through the book and found myself thinking "that wasn't in there, neither was that"...etc.

I think they focused too much on special effects, and didn't focus enough on character and relationship development (although they did kind of hint more about Ron + Hermoine). Percy is basically non-existent in the movie, whereas he played a more significant role in the book, which established his role for book 4. They also cut out a few parts regarding Black.

Overall I think the movie was good, but could have been done better. Maybe the old director was a better choice

I have no idea how they're going to do book 4 and 5 in a two or three hour span. I'm really looking forward to Goblet of Fire though
Maybe they should split those up into 2 movies?

I thought it was a good movie, I didn't know it was that long though, I was having people over last night at like 11:30 and went to the 9:30 movie, heh but I stayed for the whole thing. I think the movie played up the hermione/ron thing a bit too much however, I get a much different feeling from the movie than I did the books iirc.

 

[z0mb13]

Originally posted by: freesia39
allright, as a huge fan of the books, overall it was a LOT BETTER than the first two movies. those two were good, but this one just had a better flow.

my main beefs comes from them NOT explaining who moony, prongs, padfoot and wormtail were! how can you not explain it?! they drew the damn map, at least lupin could have mentioned that!

also no explanation of the animagi... none at all..

i thought the time references were good though. and i really enjoy this dumbledore.

AND THEY DID NOT EXPLAIN THE IMPORTANCE OF HARRY'S PATRONUS.

otherwise from these plot holes which might come back to bite them in the ass in future movies, it was good. i was DELIGHTED that fred and george FINALLY got some screen time. unfortunately percy has none, which is going to be hell to portray in book 5. sigh.

I thought prongs, padfoot, etc were explained in the 4th or 5th book???

 

[Wheatmaster]

the actress that plays hermonine is probably going to look even better when she's older, hell she looks great now! Yeah the movie made me feel like time was speeding way too fast, but i did like the part where you find out what and how really happened because harry and hermonine go back in time.

 

[Gujski]

It felt like they cut out alot, and the movie felt rushed to me.

spoilers!!!!!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Buy seeing as they basically have to go through the climax twice I can understand why, but it would have been nice to see a bit more class stuff, especially with Snape, he was more like a cameo. Also the quidditch was definately too short! And where was Cho?

 

[shopbruin]

Originally posted by: z0mb13

Originally posted by: freesia39
allright, as a huge fan of the books, overall it was a LOT BETTER than the first two movies. those two were good, but this one just had a better flow.

my main beefs comes from them NOT explaining who moony, prongs, padfoot and wormtail were! how can you not explain it?! they drew the damn map, at least lupin could have mentioned that!

also no explanation of the animagi... none at all..

i thought the time references were good though. and i really enjoy this dumbledore.

AND THEY DID NOT EXPLAIN THE IMPORTANCE OF HARRY'S PATRONUS.

otherwise from these plot holes which might come back to bite them in the ass in future movies, it was good. i was DELIGHTED that fred and george FINALLY got some screen time. unfortunately percy has none, which is going to be hell to portray in book 5. sigh.

I thought prongs, padfoot, etc were explained in the 4th or 5th book???

could have sworn it was lupin that told harry in the third. i don't have 1-4 with me right now, and i left book 5 at work. it's near the end, when he's giving the map back to him i think. and he explains why harry's patronus takes the shape of a stag.


i think quidditch has been cut for time purposes, but put in the most important match. that shot of diggory was way too short, considering what happens to him in book 4. as for cho, she really does nothing for the story in this book, but she has been cast for the 4th movie. same for oliver wood - he was hot - but they cut him because his crazy quidditch antics wasn't necessary to advance the plot line. (although a bird smacking into the whomping willow apparently was.)

i was fine with cutting crookshanks as the one who recognized sirius, but it was kinda weird the whomping willow was the one who threw them down the hole. i guess we'll never see in the movies that crookshanks is a kneazle and not a real cat.

the direction was great, i still think they need to get rid of steve kloves as the writer. his adaptation leaves the viewer wanting a tad more. even though JKR has to approve changes. sigh.

 

[spidey07]

i bet it is pretty good. seems to be getting good reviews and I enjoyed the other two.