Oh ok, I thought they left that one curse out of the movie. I didnt realize is was that one.

7/15/2007 11:59:30 AM

saw it lastnight

wasnt real impressed (which is a first because Ive read all the books so far and have liked every movie so far)

this one just didnt do much for me

7/15/2007 5:15:05 PM

man...i'm not a huge harry potter nerd, but i've read every book and seen every movie, and this was my favorite. i guess the biggest factor for me was the change in mood and atmosphere. things get real at the end of the 4th and that tone stays steady throughout this one.

7/15/2007 5:27:05 PM

yeah i was expecting that but it was just a bit too overdone for me

7/15/2007 5:29:52 PM

I love how they concentrate on what is going on inside of Harry's head. Much more convincing performance as well.

7/15/2007 5:38:56 PM

SPOILER ALERT!






Thankfully I did not re-read this one before I saw the movie. I still see it as a huge disappointment. I don't mind the fact they cut out all the fat. What was shitty though was there was no emotional tension. They didn't really convey how much (or how emo Harry was) he felt alienated by his peers and by most of the wizarding community nor did they show any real tension about how Arthur Weasley nearly dies. It was like "Harry has a dream >> Arthur Weasley is bit >> Hey its Christmas and Arthur is at the dinner table!" They also didn't really convey enough that he had the dreams so often and each time it had the door to the Hall of Prophesies.

More importantly, Dumbledore is too much of a dick in this film its not even Dumbledore; only by name, not by his actions. What the fuck was "Shouldn't you all be in class?!" that he shouted? The one quality Dumbledore possesses is his kindness. They mutilated his character. I could look past everything else they did wrong in this film; not this one thing. He was avoiding Harry in the book, not being a dick to him. And the explanation (conversation) they had at the end didn't really sufficiently show how much Dumbledore cares about Harry (didn't he tear up in the book explaining why he avoided Harry?)

Anyway, I'm glad some people enjoyed this film. The director fucking blows. (So does the actor that plays Dumbledore)

7/17/2007 9:18:11 PM

^I only agree with the part about the end

I really wanted more out of that. Some mention of the prophecy, more emotion out of dumbledore.

WHY dont they explain the prophecies more?!?!??! You can barely understand what is being said let alone get the importance of the prophecy(the average person had to of asked what was the point of that when they dont mention it after its over). I only hope that the reason they are not explaining everything is that they plan on doing that in the next movie, where they can do it all at once instead of explaining it over multiple movies.

Either they do that, or the prophecy is not that important to the overall storyline. Because the author(cant remember her name) makes sure that the important stuff that was shown in this film for the final book.

[Edited on July 17, 2007 at 10:34 PM. Reason : .]

7/17/2007 10:32:48 PM

I read an article in the magazine yesterday where the director said he cut so much off the movie because he wanted to keep it the shortest one yet. He didn't think people would pay attention for longer periods of time. He also said he made some cuts that JKR didn't advise.

I completely agree about the Dumbledore thing, that was one of my first comments after seeing it.

7/18/2007 7:13:27 AM

i figured it was something like that...

i'd like to know what his logic was behind thinking people wouldn't sit for it... they sat for all four of the others and those movies were all longer than this one...

just doesn't seem to make sense...

and here's hoping he didn't shoot the series in the foot in other ways by cutting too much out

EDIT: i went and looked up the director's history... he's a tv director, no wonder he assumed people wouldn't be able to pay attention...

[Edited on July 18, 2007 at 8:33 AM. Reason : .]

7/18/2007 8:07:05 AM

Quote :

"I read an article in the magazine yesterday where the director said he cut so much off the movie because he wanted to keep it the shortest one yet. He didn't think people would pay attention for longer periods of time. He also said he made some cuts that JKR didn't advise."

And him being a TV Director explains alot. I was ready to stay for about 3 hours...and would not have been disappointed. Way too much fat cut, took some of the flavor away...I am not to worried about the series...I am sure they will not cut so much again or try to short change us.


III

7/18/2007 9:15:39 AM

That director must be an idiot. Most diehard Harry Potter fans (the ones that see the movie) would not mind a 3 hour movie at all. . I would have loved it..

I was also hoping to see more emotion from Harry and Dumbledore at the end. In the book, Harry demolishes some of Dumbledore's possessions.

7/18/2007 10:00:57 AM

If people can sit through 3 hours of LoTR, they can sit through 3 hours of Harry Potter

I don't know anyone that would have complained if the movie was longer and for the director to cut stuff that JKR didn't advise....just plain stupid

7/18/2007 11:10:02 AM

Maybe they'll get a movie director for #6.

I mean. He might be right about 6 year olds sitting still, but don't play to the lcd.

7/18/2007 11:21:57 AM

nope, same guy's already lined up for movie 6...

7/18/2007 11:57:46 AM

Can someone get an email for him or blog? We need to let him know of dissatisfaction about cutting the movie so damn much.

Any chance they release an extended version on DVD?


III

7/18/2007 1:36:48 PM

I'm sure they will just on principal that everyone is disappointed about how short it is and would buy it.

7/18/2007 5:16:34 PM

^but they'll only announce that there will be an extended cut after they have sold the regular version to everyone who wants to buy the movie... just on principle

[Edited on July 19, 2007 at 7:46 AM. Reason : -]

7/19/2007 7:45:58 AM

Turns out it wasnt a boob job:





http://nyquil.org/archives/852-Debunkery-I-demonstrate-how-Emma-Watsons-Boobs-Were-NOT-Altered-for-the-IMAX-Poster.html

[Edited on September 5, 2007 at 12:58 AM. Reason : I can confirm that it is a valid anaglyph image with my red-blue glasses]

9/5/2007 12:56:48 AM

I still need to go see this movie

I might as well wait till it hits the buck 50 theater

9/5/2007 1:48:41 AM

There's a 3D version at the IMAX theater

9/5/2007 1:49:29 AM

went to see it today

I'll agree with all those who said it was rushed, and that it felt like I was watching sections of the book, and that the scenes did not flow well together. I almost do not see how anyone could truly understand what was going on in this movie without having read the book first.

I did not picture Kingsley as they portrayed him. I pictured him more battle-hardened like Mad-Eye.

I was also disappointed that they left out the part about the centaur getting banished from the herd b/c he helped out Dumbledore.

There was no explaination as to why Hagrid took his brother with him.

And one problem I've had with the series of books as a whole, is that they havent given Ginny, the future WIFE of Harry Potter, the needed character development

but other than that I thought it was a good movie. Could've easily been 30 mins longer.

9/6/2007 1:42:18 AM

I also recently saw. Let me just say that there should be some way to see a Harry Potter movie without seeing it with kids or their nasty parents who can't stop shoving food in their face.

I'd say this was the second worst HP film. The ending was obviously the best part, but I think they missed all the points that the book was trying to convey and just decided to go for generic action film.

Would have been nice to be longer, but I suppose most of the cuts are justified. They need to recast emma watson -- she is such a bad actress, so far behind the rest of the cast. I guess they hoped that she would grow up to be a decent actress. Turns out she didn't improve at all from when she was 10 years old. I suggest they use the Fleur Delacour actress

The absolutely worst part were the embarrassing soliloquies at the end about "WE WILL WIN BECAUSE OF LOVE AND FRIENDSHIP AND YOU ARE ALL ALONE." Couldn't have picked some lamer cliche shit to throw in, director

Tip: If you don't assume your audience is fucking stupid, you'll make a better movie. Kids are smarter than you think they are.

[Edited on September 16, 2007 at 12:09 PM. Reason : The person who will enjoy this the most is the one who has never read the books.]

9/16/2007 12:06:40 PM

not yet seen HP5, but from the criticism, sounds like a lot is similar to HP4 (movie). Namely, Dumbledore is totally out of character; shouting and raving like he's lost control of himself. HP4 was patched together like the directer only read the odd numbered pages of the book: the nonsense explanation of the wand stalemate between HP and Voldemort. To name another general instance of it being badly made: the whole dragon/triwizard sequence where the dragon is allowed to lay waste to the rooftops of hogwarts and nearly kill HP multiple times; basically just a prostitution of the story in order to show flashy dragon effects. The story clearly emphasized that the faculty would take every precaution to ensure safety, yet they sit in the stands the entire time of the dragon chase. Of course, in the book the dragon never chased him all over hogwarts....

But god, I wish they dumped dumbledore after HP3 when it was plain he was doing the character wrong.

9/16/2007 3:11:18 PM

Yeah, the first Dumbledore was great. Too bad he died.

9/16/2007 9:43:01 PM

Actually, I like the new Dumbledore better. The old one was too damn old, and he spoke too quietly.

9/16/2007 10:33:18 PM

And I doub't the changes are coming from the actor more than from the director and writers

9/16/2007 11:36:09 PM

Quote :

"Actually, I like the new Dumbledore better. The old one was too damn old, and he spoke too quietly."

^^ Thats exactly how he is in the book: quiet strength and power.

This new one is not anything like the way Dumbledore is supposed to be.

9/17/2007 12:24:08 AM

didnt hagrid's hut move between the 2nd and 3rd move

9/17/2007 12:56:25 AM

^I think it did. I think Alfonso Cuaron (sp?) pretty much redid Hogwarts from the 1&2 to the 3rd. I think the subsequent movies stayed the same as #3. At least thats what I can recall.

9/17/2007 1:09:37 AM

they shouldnt be switching directors so much...that has to be annoying for the actors, to have to keep their characters the same yet deal with a new director ever other movie or so

9/17/2007 1:11:50 AM

Quote :

"And I doub't the changes are coming from the actor more than from the director and writers"

True. Although I was willing to believe HP3 was within the realm of "actor interpretation", Dumbledore in HP4 is so far from Ddore of the book that either the screenwriters or director or both wanted that or just didn't know or care enough to fix it. Still looking forward to catching HP5 if I can find it in a theater near Blacksburg, VA. I miss the Blueridge.

9/17/2007 4:43:53 PM

i think the new dumbledore will be a good fit for the more intense sequences in 6 and 7

9/17/2007 9:34:55 PM