Harry Potter

[Soluna89]

I went to the 6:20 PM showing at my theater on Friday. Amazingly tickets were still available. ^_^

Spoiler:

Half the theater melted when Harry got into the tub, and I was furious that they left out the Sphinx and the fact that Rita can become a beetle. That's crucial in the next book, isn't it?

Other than that I LOVED the movie, and would see it again if I had the money. w00t!

[Jennpurr]

I have a question that has been bothering me for a long time. Who gave Harry his father's invisibility cloak or do we find out later? Was it Dumbledore or Sirius? Should I know the answer to this?

Thanks in advance,

Jen

[LesbianJedi87]

lol It was Dumbledore who gave him the cloak. If you read the first book Im pretty sure it answers it in the end...

And about the movie...lots of things were cut out due to length. But I was still happy with it and Im seeing it again tomorrow.

[Jennpurr]

Thank you!! I, unfortunately, have yet to have read any of the books. I had a feeling it was Dumbledore though.

Does anyone else miss Richard Harris as Dumbledore? Michael Gambon is a good actor, but he's just not fit for the role, in my opinion.

Jen

[LesbianJedi87]

Ah yes Richard Harris was a fabulous Dumbledore. Im not so keen to this new actor, I believe he protray's Dumbledore very differently and I just can't get used to it.

One thing that irked me in the movie is that when Harry goes down into the waiting chamber after his name came out of the goblet of fire, Dumbledore amoung with some others come in and I just didnt like the fact that Dumbledore pushed him and started yelling. That wasnt like his character at all.

[Jennpurr]

I totally agree with you. I was shocked when I saw that scene myself. Dumbledore had a right to be upset. He cares about Harry and obviously, he didn't want anything to happen to him. Had Richard been doing the scene, he may still have pushed him, as that's the way the scene was written I assume, but I think he would have handled it more calmly and gingerly.

It really didn't help me to watch The Sorcerer's Stone today. It just made me miss Richard Harris even more. I was admiring his acting. You can tell that he was a very kind person. It flows through him.

Jen

[Culzean]

I love the story of how Richard Harris came to be in the HP movies. He was offered the role of Dumbledore and initially declined. Then he got a call from his granddaughter. She told him if he didn't take the role she would never speak to him again.

What was he to do?

I shall be eternally grateful to his granddaughter. Richard Harris was the ultimate Dumbledore.

[Jennpurr]

WOW... I didn't know that. If I was ever offered a role in Harry Potter, I would take it.

I shall be eternally grateful to his granddaughter. Richard Harris was the ultimate Dumbledore.

So true.

It's sad. I read somewhere that he was well enough to have starred in TPoA. It's a shame really, that he wasn't able to.


Jen

[SySnootles]

Trying this again...

I prefer Gambon to Harris. He seemed to capture the Dumbledore from the books better than Harris did. Just my opinion, though.

And, since I don't know who did it, I'm just asking openly...

Why was my previous post deleted?

[urnofosiris]

Maybe you did it yourself by accident or maybe the board ate your reply. You can delete your own post if it is the last one in a thread. If we delete a post we´d message you to let you know why.
As for the actors who play Dumbledore. Neither of these men are as I pictured Dumbledore, but I prefer Richard Harris. He seems to excude more of the authority and strength of Dumbledore.

[Jennpurr]

but I prefer Richard Harris. He seems to excude more of the authority and strength of Dumbledore.

Agreed. His personality is warmer also. He fits Dumbledore better. When I look at Gambon, I see a grumpy old man.

[Alcy]

I don't know if I can decide between Harris and Gambon, both are(were) venerable actors of their generation who exude wisdom and gravitas.

I'm glad that Richard Harris got to play one hugely popular role endearing him to millions as his swansong. I can see why he wanted to turn the role down, it's not the sort of film that you find in his portfolio. He brought something weighty to the first two installments of Potter, which under Chris Columbus' direction, were not quite the movies they could have been.
I find Gambon more charming, can't explain why, I think it's his more lyrical voice and twinkly little eyes...and his costumes have been better!! And also because Azkaban and Goblet are the best movies in the series so far.
Cheers
Alcy

[urnofosiris]

I saw it today. I am not nearly as enthusiastic as the reviews, official and otherwise, have been. I understand they could impossibly include all the events from the book, but that makes me extra annoyed at some of the scenes they made up to add non needed action which wasted precious minutes that could have been used better. Some of the alterations I understand, but I feel some others they made were downright dreadful. They seriously lessened the surprise I felt when I read the book of Mad Eye Moody turning out to be the bad guy, with among other things that ridiculous tongue flicking he did and Crouch senior obviously noticing it. If anyone who has not read the book was still surprised in the end by who Mad Eye really was, I´d find that a surprise. The scene in the pensieve was far less chilling than it was in the book where Barty´s son looked like a weak possibly innocent young man sent to his doom by his father. The Voldemort at the beginning and the Voldemort reborn did impress me all that much. Of course there were a great many things to like, even for little anally rentively opposed to changing the book old me, but I will need to rewatch it. I shall be getting the DVD as soon as it comes out. As with the other movies, it may improve on me after repeated viewings. I did not like the Chamber of Secrets much at all when I first saw it and now I think it is my favorite of the lot.

[Hemiola]

Having finally caught it last night, I can now join in on the great "Harris/Gambon Dumbledore Debate"--

Harris was, to be sure, excellent. However, if one considers the evolution of the character as he appears in the books, Gambon is the logical choice for a successor. Remember that Dumbledore is supposed to be sufficiently energetic to actually fight in the upcoming war, even going so far as to confront Tom/Voldemort directly (cf. "Order of the Phoenix"). I really cannot forsee the aged and already ailing Richard Harris being able to bring off such scenes. As far as the current film is concerned, once again it is a matter of energy and authority: I think that Gambon is the one who embodies the part as Rowling conceived it.

Now for the rest of the film--

I have no problem with the omitted parts, especially the dumping of the slightly "twee" stuff with Rita Skeeter (although I have to say that Miranda Richardson was, as expected, excellent:) ). Likewise I think that the pensieve material was done about as well as it could be, with the "trial" evoking (at least for this American;) ) something of the atmosphere of the infamous McCarthy hearings (wherein the witnesses were also being pressured to "name names"). All three of the young actors have grown nicely into their parts (especially Emma Watson), with a very appealing newcomer for the part of Cho Chang. All of the other parts were well cast, especially the young man who played Viktor Krum and the woman who played Mme. Maxine. The remainder of the continuing characters were up to standard, especially my favorites Robbie Coltrane and Alan Rrickman.

Special fx were, as we have come to expect, "state-of-the-art", and there was some cute dialogue. My personal favorite:
Ron: Say, Hermione, you're a girl...
Hermione: Nicely spotted, Ron.

I too will be getting the DVD.

[LesbianJedi87]

Ah dont forget the actress who plays Fleur! She was just lovely and well...goooorgeous. This movie had alot of funny parts that my family didnt laugh at...figures. I cant wait for the next movie. Although its been said that movie 5 will be the kids last movie, I hope this isnt true. It wouldnt feel right seeing entirely different actors playing the parts in the last 2 movies especially the 6th...most ESPECIALLY the 6th....which still bothers me....but I guess we have to wait and see!

[Shinnen]

Just wanted to say that many people wanted to strangle me to death when I said I watched the 7th of November.

But then, I was jealous of my colleagues, who under my unfair and nosy and loudmouth boss, got to watch the movie before any cuts 1 and a half months before the premiere.

I think this 4th movie is much better than the 3rd movie. The 3rd movie had wonderful sets and colors but the story was just badly edited to fit the movies. I'm not saying that the 4th movie is the best... but i do think that the child actors have improves immensely. My favourite had to be the 1st and 2nd movie.

[cbrymm]

I just returned from seeing the movie. I loved it. I wasn't very impressed with the beginning, but about ten minutes later I was able to over look that. I agree, the new Dumbledore doesn't quite do it for me. The last one, though closer to how I pictured Dumbledore, failed as well. I guess I just won't be satisfied. Anyway, I would just like to say I love Emma Watson. Yum

[SySnootles]

I think that Gambon is the one who embodies the part as Rowling conceived it.

That's almost exactly how I feel too. I felt Richard Harris' portrayal was too frail for the Dumbledore from the books. Rowling's Dumbledore is a bit of a prankster with a sense of humor (best witnessed at the end of PoA right before Harry and Hermione walk into the infirmary to see Ron (and see their 'other' selves disappear)). I thought Harris did an excellent job acting-wise, but I don't think he captured the Dumbledore I had read about for three (at the time, I believe) books.

[Jennpurr]

I can't believe noone has mentioned Moaning Myrtle. She was especially good in this chapter of the movies. Hee... trying to look at Harry naked under the water. She's a naughty ghost.

Does anyone know if she will possibly make another guest appearance in any of the other movies coming up? I have yet to have started any of the books as of yet.

Jen

[LesbianJedi87]

I think thats the last we will see of her, she's not in the 5th or 6th books...but who knows! She's a very sneaky lil ghost

[Sasha]

I just got back from seeing GoF for the second time (saw it as soon as it came out, back in November), and although on the whole I loathe the movies, I'm a harscore HP-books fan, I like to see them 'just for the sake of it', so I can comment I suppose. So here we go...

Oh, maybe first I should point out that big changes to the plot actually don't bother me too much - I wouldn't want anything to be added or changed, but I don't mind subplots being cut out as long as it's not backstory that will be important later *coughmarauderscough* - I appreciate that film is a different medium, and things have to be condensed, we cannot have the whole book on the big screen. The omission of SPEW, for example, didn't really bother me. What does annoy me, to say the least, is pointless changes to tiny details, because there is no good reason to change them. Hermione's dress colour (it should be blue) being the obvious one. Some say it doesn't matter, it's just a small nitpick, but I find it incredibly disrespectful to JKR. Hence forthcoming comments about 'they changed such and such'.

Ok then, points of interest...

- They started with the Riddle House scene. Big thumbs up.
- I'm sorry, I really don't think Dan Radcliffe's acting has improved... well, maybe a little bit, but he still seems just an empty hollow shell of Harry to me. No offence to any Daniel fans here, but I really cannot stand him.
- I know Dan can't wear contact lenses, so they can't make Harry's eyes green, but surely it can't be that difficult to digitally colour his eyes green on extreme close-up shots, can it?
- Ron in bed, at the beginning of the movie - suddenly he's all muscular and... manly.
- We're four movies in, and Ron is still being used as the dumb comic relief. Hermione being given what was originally Ron's line - 'if you have to kill Harry you'll have to kill us too' - in PoA infuriated me, possibly even more than Hermione's dress colour. That was Ron showing how heroic he really is - yes, he's funny and he has his dumb moments, but he's a hero, and the filmmakers seem determind to take that from him and reduce him to a sidekick.
- Hermione, on the other hand, is getting too much screentime. I LOVE Hermione, but the book is not called 'Harry Potter and Hermione Granger and the Goblet of Fire'. I'm all for having an ensemble cast, as opposed to just Harry, but let's make it fair please. Hermione and Ron are both Harry's closest friends.
- Hermione's hair. It is supposed to be bushy usually and straight at the Yule Ball. Not sleek and curly usually and sleek and curly at the Yule Ball. And it's obviously possibly to make Emma Watson's hair bushy, because it was in the first two films, so they shouldn't be trying to make her the cliched 'beautiful heroine who everyone wants' now. (Emma is pretty though )
- Hermione's dress. I already mentioned this, at least twice. Bad bad bad bad BAD!
- The Yule Brawl! They kept the Yule Brawl! Being a raving R/Hr shipper, I would have been furious if they'd cut that out, so I'm obviously very happy that they've not only kept it but improved it! 'Next time there's a ball, ask me before somebody else does, and not as a last resort!' is obviously a classic line, but the addition of 'Ron, you ruined everything' is beautiful, and Emma just breaks my heart in that scene.
- Aside from the above R/Hr shippiness, the whole movie seems to be stuffed full of H/Hr shipping. I'm perfectly happy to see how much they mean to eachother, I love the Harry/Hermione friendship, but their meaningful glances in the film were getting a little too meaningful, and, again, excluding Ron. Not good.
- And called me biased, but I loathed Emma's acting in all the scenes that could potentially be interpreted as H/Hr. She got so shrill and melodramatic, what happened to geeky bossy Hermione? *sigh* As a self-confessed R/Hr shipper herself, surely Emma could try being a *little* less intense with Harry...?
- My favourite bit in the whole film has to be the part where Ron gets his dress-robes and says 'Ginny, this must be for you', and she replies 'I'm not wearing that, it's ghastly'. I really don't know why - perhaps it's because her voice is just a little deeper there, perhaps it's because she said 'ghastly' instead of just 'horrible' - but that was when I really though ohhhhhhhhh yeah, Ginny's not a girl any more, she's a *woman*.
- Also, Ginny's hair. It's red. And shiny. Need I say more?
- The Patil twins are not both supposed to be in Gryffindor. The one who isn't Parvati, whose name I can't remember, is a Ravenclaw. Another 'pointless' nitpick.
- Please correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't it be 'Parvati' not 'Pavarti'? That was driving me mad throughout the whole film, as was the way they were pronouncing 'Beaubatonx'.
- And on the subject of accents, is Michael Gambon American? I swear, there were a few tiny moments in the film where he sounded slightly American. It was bugging me. I really don't like 'the new Dumbledore' though, so I may be biased.
- David Tennant. What can I say? For me, he will always be The Doctor, so the fact that I liked him as Barty Crouch Jr is really a compliment. Seeing the film for the second time I was able to appreciate just how great his acting range is - the little tongue flicky thing, the madness in his eyes, all those little nuances that make each of his roles different. Plus, leather coat. Always a bonus.
- First task was good, but too long, and they added too much to the dragon fight that wasn't in the book. Why did the dragon have to die? She was only being a good mummy, protecting her eggs.
- Second task was great, possibly the best bit in the film. Stayed close to canon, and exactly as I pictured it. Excellent.
- Third task, like the First one, was too stretched out and changed from the book. It was obviously trying to be 'poignant' , but wasn't. Honestly, who thought that miles of killer hedges and mist could be better than boggarts, a sphinx, and a giant spider?
- Don't get me started on Voldemort, this is already ridiculously long and it would double in length if I started ranting about Ralph Fiennes. Let's just say I was NOT impressed.
- Um... after you chop your own hand off, shouldn't you be doubled up on the ground in pain for at least a few minutes because you go prancing around the cauldron slicing open The Chosen One's arm?
- The slashiness... oh the slashiness! So much slashiness! 'Do you know the prefect's bathroom, on the third floor' caused mild amusement, and 'what's got your wand in a knot?' gave me a fit of hysterics (I didn't catch that line the first time around!) On the other hand, 'my wand and Voldemort's sort of... connected' conjured a very disturbing mental image. I'm rather worried by how perverted my little mind is.

Er... I think that's enough for now.

[nerdbert]

I love Harry Potter, I really do, but that movie was one big fiasco IMHO. They put there only the strictly necessary, so we would recognize it was Harry Potter, and nothing else!

First, what the hell happened to Winky?! How are they going to introduce her on The Order of the Phoenix (and God help me, they'd better do so) if she didn't appear on The Goblet of Fire? And Dobby?? How did they expect us to believe Neville stole from Snape's stash? Really, that didn't make any sense.

Sasha has some good points, it wasn't necessary to put everything, but they cut off some important part, not to mention all the small details they changed. Hermione's dress, her hair. Oh yeah, not to mention the fact that they made Beauxbatons and Drumstrang all-girls and all-boys schools. The book clearly stated that they had boys and girls in equal numbers in both of them. And what was that little presentation, huh? Yikes.

I know it's been a while since I've read the book, but I don't think it mentions anywhere Professor McGonagall giving dance lessons. What was the purpose of that? Of course, I loved the babbling, bumbling bunch of baboons bit. Maggie Smith SO rocks!

Another thing, was it just me or Cedric was kind of... stuck up? That wasn't how I pictured him at all. He's a Hufflepuff for Gods sake!

I loved the bathroom scene, though. That was just too funny! Myrtle was excellent there.

Points to 'minor' characters: Ginny - because I love that little spitfire - and Nevile, his expression during the spider on Cruciatus was very believable.

The tasks, well, I agree with Sasha's assessment. Both the First and Third Tasks were stretched out. I would have preferred the boggarts, Sphinx and spider (Acromantula?). And the dragon did not die! Excellent visual effects, though.

I could be here all day mentioning what I liked and what I didn't like, but I think it's pretty clear that this movie wasn't really what I was expecting. Visually, it's the best, but it slaughtered the book. The best movies were the first and second. The third, well... I'm not happy with what they did with my favorite HP book.

[Sasha]

Dobby and Winky are in the 5th book, but I don't think they're that important to the plot are they? It's Kreacher who is vital...

The missing plot-point that annoyed me the most was the lack of info about Neville's parents - I mean, they do that big scene with Neville's face when he sees the spider under the crutiatus curse, and then they don't even explain why except for one remark during the penseive scene which is barely noticeable above all the other plot-points they tried to cram into that one little scene. They're really gonna have to explain about Neville's parents in the next film, it's definitely not something that can be cut out! I suppose they can build the explanation into that scene in St Mungos where they see the Longbottoms.

I think Cedric was ok actually - a little stuck-up, but no more than he is in the book.

*scuttles off to check whether McGonagall gave dancing lessons in the books*

[nerdbert]

Well, maybe Dobby and Winky aren't that important to the main plot, but they do appear a lot on OoTP. Plus, I like 'em.

Ya know, they made Ron much less annoying on the movie than he was on the book. Really, I don't like him much. So what if he's not always in the damn spotlight? I'm sure Harry'd trade places with him in a trice. He never thinks things through, and is completely PREJUDICED against anyone who dares to...what? contradict him? Also, I think he hates being poor, but if you think about it, he is trying to make Harry feel bad about being rich. The other Weasleys ('cept Percy, the jerk) seem fine with it, and Fred and George have their own shop now, so all is good. They are wealthy in family and love - what else could you ask for?

Well, anyway, I don't think the lack of info on the Longbottom's made much difference at all. It's not like Neville has a big part (though I do like him) so the explanation they gave was enough for me.

What irritated me was the veela part! Really, they only mentioned it once. Ron commenting about Fleur being a veela with goo goo eyes. They didn't say anything about it, what is a veela, how they work. I was really disappointed they didn't dance on the Quidditch World Cup. Didn't make much difference, I know, but I would have liked to see it.

Aw, I don't think Cedric is stuck up in the books at all. He's a Hufflepuff, after all, aren't they supposed to be 'loyal and hardworking'. Stuck up is more Slytherin, I think. Not that I dislike Slytherin. In fact, it's my favorite house.

One thing I'm not looking forward is Harry's portrayal in the next two movies. He was a complete ass all OoTP and did some really stupid things on HBP. Still, I like him. Gutsy kid, has his faults, can be a bitch. Whatever, he has a megalomaniac psychopath after him and a damn prophesy to fulfill while having to deal with the death of his godfather. Mix that with hormones and lots of teen angst, I'd be a bitch too.

If you figure out the mystery of the dancing lessons do tell me, ok?

[LesbianJedi87]

I think too many people are over analyzing things. Basing the movie way too much on the books and complaining about every single detail. Who care's if Herminone's hair isnt bushy, who care's if someone's line got switched. Who care's if a character like Dobby didn't appear in the 4th film. They can't add every single little detail to every movie can they? Unless everyone WANTS to sit around for 5 hour's just so all the little thing's can be added.

Me, I love the movies. I love all the actor's. I absolutely do not mind that Emma Watson has more screen time, because I adore her. I think the movie's are going along just fine and people should perhap's not take thing's so seriously. It's just a movie afterall.

[urnofosiris]

Personally, I would not mind watching for a week if that is what it takes to film the books to the letter, but at the same time I also do not really mind that they cannot put every event from the book into the movie, it makes reading the books all the more rewarding. I do mind when they start making up their own stuff which is taking time away from important details they could have shown otherwise. Harry getting chased by the dragon all around Hogwarts, out of sight of everyone, dangling from the roof, falling from the roof, getting back on his broom, getting chased by the dragon again, seemed to go on forever. It bored me and annoyed me. It was unnecessary added and forced ´excitement´ and the dance lesson was a weak attempt at adding humor. At times it feels that when they are omitting certain things from the movie they are not considering what will be happening in the parts to come.

As for taking things too seriously, tell it to the fundies who think JK Rowling is corrupting the minds of our defenseless younglings and turning them into witches. People can discuss all the dresses, hairstyles, house elfs and any other details that they want, (except for JK´s evil plans to end the world as we know it), whether they are in the movie or not and they can take it as seriously as they will. It keeps the discussion alive.

[Sasha]

I can't put it any better than that, DrG said it all. I do not mind things being taken out, as long as they're not vital (which I still think Neville's story is, and he does have a big role in OotP), I understand why that is done (although I would be quite happy to sit through a ridiculously long film if that meant they got everything in), but I do mind things being changed or added, I think that's disprespectful to JKR and the fans, not to mention unnecessary.

Besides, I like overanalyzing things. I'm not telling anyone else to, and I don't think I said anything downright rude, just my opinions on different aspects of it, so I don't see what's wrong with a little procrastination.

[Hemiola]

Actually, I don't think the content of the films is that serious a problem, since it is worth keeping in mind that, unlike an earlier generation of writers working in or with Hollywood, JK Rowling keeps a very close watch over the content of the scripts of the movies.

She has stated in several interviews (including some of those included in the various DVD editions) that she works closely with both the screenwriter and the director to make certain that what goes into the film (a) is in line with her intentions as the creator of the story and (b) that the script reflects what she knows is going to happen in the future books/films.

This is a loooonnnnng way from the bad old days of the Hollywood studio system, when the studios would pay "x" amount of dollars for the film rights to a given book, and then proceed to do whatever the heck they wanted, even if it involved completely changing the story! You can get some idea of the level of respect that was shown to writers back in the "bad old days" by remembering that the notorious Harry Cohn, the head of Columbia Pictures, once referred to writers as "schmucks with typewriters, the least important component of any picture"!!!

[urnofosiris]

For sure she is involved, I am willing to bet she would not have parted with the movie rights without some degree of control over what they were going to do to her books and hurrah for that. I think that it is absolutely a must for any movie based on a book, to have the author involved if possible. I wish Jane Austen could have time travelled to help avert the recent Pride and Prejudice movie disaster.
I willingly believe they would respect JK´s opinions enough to not alter something in such a way that she would be dead set against it, but at the same time she cannot have a hand or say in all of it, including the changes. For example she said she was quite surprised by the look of professor Flitwick, not a change they discussed beforehand apparently.
As it is, even if JK herself approves of every single change they have made or even she were the one who had made these changes herself, I still do not like a lot of them, especially in this last movie, but at the same time I feel the movies stay true to the spirit of the books and as close to the story as possible for me to enjoy them and I will go see them all in the cinema and keep buying the DVDs.

[Bound2Her]

so someone posted the trailer for the new movie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxmTaCnuMPA

can't wait!