steel Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 Best book and best movie. I love this story. There were obviously some inconsistancies, but there really wasn't anything that majorly hurt the plot. I agree with everyone, it needed to be about three hours longer, but I also understand that movie studios are trying to cut down on length (though I don't agree). Luna, Tonks, and the thestrals were brilliant. Lupin is still the hugest miscast in history. I really didn't need the sound to momentarily turn off at Sirius' death. How totally predictable is that? I'm going to die if they do that with Dumbledore (I just read that passage again today and started welling up). I loved the way they did the Harry-Cho breakup in the movie. I actually liked that part better than the overcomplicated business with Marietta. Veritaserum is cause for much more akwardness between the two than lack of a forgiveness. Was it just me or did Umbridge definitely NOT look like a toad? Every HP movie so far has suffered from something, and this is no exception. SS/PS and CoS suffered from bad acting. PoA suffered from bad directing. GoF suffered from bad writing. OotP suffered from bad pacing. I really hope DH is a truly fantastic (two-part) movie. 4.5/5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
resonancej Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 I think several people here have already stated that it should have been longer...much longer...like add another hour to it. Things were skipped that should't have been and key plot points rearraged or left out for god knows what reason. I didn't care for it at all, and that's a shame becuase all of the movies so far have been at least decent. I like David Yates, I think his visual style was appropriate to the tone of the book, I just think the new scriptwriter botched the adaptation...badly. The one good thing I will say about the movie was that Evanna Lynch was spot on as Luna Lovegood, I LOVED her. And all I have to say about Imelda Staunton is the first time she did Dolores Umbridge's "hem hem" in the court room, I litterally jumped and wanted to wretch... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 ^Why are you blaming the scriptwriter? The writing was fine. Not nearly as crappy as in GoF. It's the director's fault that whatever you're thinking of got cut. I'm disappointed that Ron didn't get to fly as well, but it's not as though anything that was cut can't easily be picked up later (although I will be disappointed if I don't get to see him kick McLaggan's a$$ at tryouts in HBP). I want Chris Colombus to come back for Deathly Hallows. IMO, the first two movies would have been pitch perfect if not for the trio's inexperienced acting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuanSe_Colombia Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 I saw it the first day(july11th) It is so awesome! When they fly trought LOndon is great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 I saw it yesterday, it was alright. It wasn't bad, it wasn't good, it was alright. Hermione and Luna are hot, thats all. I can not wait for the sixth movie so I could yell "SNAPE KILLS DUMBLEDORE!" on premiere night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arrowfanman Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 I personally believe 5 to be the weakest book. It has the most pages with the least content--a lot of filler to make the necessary transition. It's for that reason that I'm rather glad how much they were able to axe from the story. Therefore, I was rather pleased what they were able to do with the movie. I still think this one hurt from the apparent absence of John Williams' score. I agree with Homer--this film, they're finally growing out of that "kids" phase and I'm allowed to think Hermione is hot! (She's even legal in the UK ) And Luna was pretty cute too. I think Luna was a delightful character, Umbridge was the flat-out BEST performance in ANY Harry Potter film, and Bellatrax Lastrange was a well done, fun bad-girl! Loved it. So all and all, I respect the movies seperatly from the books and this one was no exception. -Jahan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thefitness Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 I think Luna was a delightful character, Umbridge was the flat-out BEST performance in ANY Harry Potter film, and Bellatrax Lastrange was a well done, fun bad-girl! Loved it. So all and all, I respect the movies seperatly from the books and this one was no exception. -Jahan I agree all those characters really stood out, at least to me.(Luna was my favorite) A lot of people were complaining the movie wasn't like the book. They need to start looking at them separately like you mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 I personally believe 5 to be the weakest book. It has the most pages with the least content--a lot of filler to make the necessary transition. It's not filler. Order of the Phoenix focuses on relationships and backstory. It's the "growing up" book in the series. Of course, with that logic, all the books are "filler to make the necessary transition," so I guess you're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coasterbadboy Posted July 17, 2007 Share Posted July 17, 2007 I really didn't want to like HP5 more than 3, since 3 has been the most masterful in terms of direction. In 3, every scene was filled with magic. (Like the camera flying through the clock tower backwards when Harry and Hermione travel back in time, and then the camera flys forward through the tower when they are arriving back at the present. Brilliant! And of course, the addition of the clock tower as a symbol was a stroke of genius, considering that the whole book/movie is about Harry struggling with the events of his past, his immediate present, and Professor Trelawney's prediction that the Dark Lord will rise in Harry's future.) So I didn't think 5 would surpass that level of detail (because 4 didn't even come close). But I LOVED 5. It had the same level of detail. The same care with the direction. But it had much more. It was more real, but at the same time, more magical. It perfectly balanced the grim realities with the humorous moments. Pacing was great. Some things were left out from the book, of course, but the movie certainly didn't suffer because of it. My brain just filled in the missing things. Professor Umbridge--SPOT ON! She rocks! (I loved that she was literally torturing Harry while little kitties are mewing behind him. The ultimate innocence and the ultimate evil at the same time. Brilliant.) Book 5 was so completely bloated with unnecessary junk, that the first 500 pages or so are almost unreadable. (They don't even arrive at Hogwarts until page 200!! And what happens in that 200 pages? Harry fights two dementors and visits the Order's headquarters to learn that Voldemort may or may not be after something. AND THAT'S IT. Dull, dull, dull. Oh yeah, and he's mad at Ron and Hermione. Whoopee.) Movie 5? Two thumbs up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masterofthematrix91 Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 I saw it last week at the midnight showing. Don't get me wrong it was a good potter flick but they cut A SH*T LOAD of stuff out. They also changed stuff that REALLy didn't need to be changed. (Book: nevile breaks the proficy Movie: Lucious malfoy breaks it. WTF??!?) Overall they kept to the book sometimes. 7/10 not my favorite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Malfoy broke the prophecy to save time. It's not anything to get upset about. Did somebody just say that 3 was directed well? WHAT?! I'm fairly sure that Cuaron read 3 without bothering to read the others. He added all kinds of stuff that changed the feel of the story completely, put in the cheesiest ending possible, put everything out of order, loaded it with obvious flaws, and made the most obvious Hollywood choices (like the clock tower - anyone could have thought of that). That movie is WAY overblown. The only good thing about it is that the trio FINALLY learned how to act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coasterbadboy Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Yes, 3 was directed with grand mastery. "The first true Harry Potter movie -- the first to capture not only the books' sense of longing, but their understanding of the way magic underlies the mundane." Salon.com "For the final hour of the two-hour- and-21-minute Azkaban is the closest any of the films has gotten to capturing the enormously pleasing essence of the Potter books." LA Times "Not only is this dazzler by far the best and most thrilling of the three Harry Potter movies to date, it's a film that can stand on its own even if you never heard of author J.K. Rowling and her young wizard hero." Rolling Stone "The third Harry Potter movie is the first one that actually looks and feels like a movie, rather than a staged reading with special effects." New York Times And I happen to agree wholeheartedly. (And it has a much higher rating/review average than 5. 89% vs. 77%.) But no one is right or wrong here. We just each have our preferences for what we like in movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now