Goblet of Fire.

[ahoythematey]

Felt great to see the blue tights and red cape on the big screen again, even if it was only a brief trailer.  I expect fantastic music if the trailer's is any indication.

Oh, and Year 4 was okay, all things considered.  I still think Prisoner' is the best Potter movie so far.

[Shockeye]

I think the wife and I are going to see Goblet in DLP on Tuesday. Digital is all sold out until Monday. Bastards.

[ahoythematey]

I thought GoF's music was far below par this time.  Prisoner of Azhkaban's made the movie almost feel like one big poem.

[Shockeye]

Prisoner of Azhkaban's made the movie almost feel like one big poem.

Prisoner had the best music of the first three.

[schild]

I'll be seeing mediocre fantasy movie #17 sometime next week.

[Fabricated]

Should I feel bad about having not seen any of the Harry Potter movies, nor having read any of the books?

[Rasix]

Should I feel bad about having not seen any of the Harry Potter movies, nor having read any of the books?

Not really, but the books are excellent and the last two films have been good.  If you're just doing it to thumb your nose to the mainstream, then perhaps you're doing yourself a disfavor.

I liked GoF better than PoA. I think the farther they get from the Chris Columbus pics the better they end up being as movies.  This one also felt a lot more like the book than PoA.  Of course, I'm biased;  Goblet of Fire is the favorite of the series for me.  This one also moved pretty damn well for a 2 hour 30 minute flick.

Did anyone else think "OMG, M. Bison!"  when Krum showed up for the Yule Ball?

[Samwise]

Should I feel bad about having not seen any of the Harry Potter movies, nor having read any of the books?

A little bit, yes.

[Shockeye]

Looks like the wife and I are going to see this tonight in digital projection. Turns out some people she knew had tickets they couldn't use. Joyous.

[stray]

Should I feel bad about having not seen any of the Harry Potter movies, nor having read any of the books?

A little bit, yes.

The movies keep coming on TV, but never in the right order.....And I tend to forget about checking older film releases whenever I head to a video store.

One day it'll all click, I suppose.

[Triforcer]

Everyone except Harry and Hermione have gotten hit with the ugly stick as compared to 1-2.  I literally wince everytime I see a closeup of Ron in 3 or the previews for 4.  Most other characters didn't fare any better.  Without getting into creepy territory, Hermione, lets just say...has chosen not to go in that direction.

[schild]

You can say it. Hermione Emma Watson is on her way to hotsville. Unfortunately, she's what? 15? And a not very good actress. I want to see a cage match involving spiked bats between her and Dakota Fanning in a decade.

[MrHat]

I like that they all looked ugly and awkard.  Really fits in with that phase.

Although, the kid that plays Potter can't act AT ALL.

[Samwise]

The movies keep coming on TV, but never in the right order.....And I tend to forget about checking older film releases whenever I head to a video store.

One day it'll all click, I suppose.

God forbid you go to the library and read a book, eh?   

I saw the movie today.  I think they did as good a job as possible given the length of the source material.  When I looked back on what was and wasn't in the movie, I realized that the book was really composed of several intertwining stories, and for the movie they just took one of those stories (the tournament) and either excluded the others (SPEW, Rita Skeeter, Harry and Cho, Hagrid and Maxime) or whittled them down a lot.  But the one story that they did do, they did a very good job on, even if it felt a bit rushed.

Wonder if they'll be able to pull it off again for Order of the Phoenix.  Not holding my breath.   

[stray]

Oh, I do my fair share of reading, but I generally haven't had a positive opinion of fantasy novels. It's just not my thing. So far, there's only one fantasy writer that I like.

As for the Potter movies, I wasn't very curious about them until I found out about some of the cast (I'll watch anything with Oldman in it, for instance). And knowing my own tastes, I'm pretty sure that if the stories have a chance with me, it'll be on some visual storytelling level (i.e. film), not literary.

[Roac]

I saw the movie today.  I think they did as good a job as possible given the length of the source material.  When I looked back on what was and wasn't in the movie, I realized that the book was really composed of several intertwining stories, and for the movie they just took one of those stories (the tournament) and either excluded the others (SPEW, Rita Skeeter, Harry and Cho, Hagrid and Maxime) or whittled them down a lot.  But the one story that they did do, they did a very good job on, even if it felt a bit rushed.

I'm wondering if they haven't kept the movie time down because these are kids books.  That is, there wasn't nearly as much reason to make it a 3h+ movie as with LotR, because of the intended audiance.  And with a 700 page book, you're hard pressed to get everything into a 2.5h movie without massive cuts.  And yeah, there seemed to be a lot of time in the books spent on character socialization, as opposed to LotR which dove into great detail on specific issues (eg, council of Elrond, etc).  Much harder to sum up the book as a result.  I wonder - would it have been better to make 2 movies out of this book?

[Trippy]

I enjoyed the movie -- two thumbs up from me!

The Superman trailer was interesting up until the end where they showed the CG looking Superman.

[Paelos]

The movies was good in the sense that it did tell the story decently. The devil is in the details with book > movie conversions. You can't possibly do it all, so you have to make some cuts. That's where the fun begins. Did they make the right cuts? Fleur, who comes back later, got almost no coverage in the movie as a character. I think that's a mistake. Dumbledore, with the transition of actors, is not being played to the pattern we've seen in the books. I have a problem with him in this movie. He's a little off and I can't put my finger on why.

The rest of the movie is great. The pacing is quick, but that's the only way you could do it. The small plots were exchanged for action, and it places, hints at action. I liked that. It did well to establish moods, and it worked well with material to make the major points concrete.

[Ironwood]

Fleur never really comes back later.  I wouldn't be surprised if she just kept getting cut for the movies.  Her part in the books is totally forgettable and unnecessary.

Ooh, I like the Spellchecker...

[Trippy]

Dumbledore, with the transition of actors, is not being played to the pattern we've seen in the books. I have a problem with him in this movie. He's a little off and I can't put my finger on why.

Richard Harris *was* Dumbledore. Presumably Michael Gambon is intentionally not trying to mimic Richard Harris's portrayal which is understandable but unfortunately that means his version will never be as good. He doesn't even look the part to me, with his grey bread vs. Richard's white version.

[Shockeye]

Dumbledore, with the transition of actors, is not being played to the pattern we've seen in the books. I have a problem with him in this movie. He's a little off and I can't put my finger on why.

Richard Harris *was* Dumbledore. Presumably Michael Gambon is intentionally not trying to mimic Richard Harris's portrayal which is understandable but unfortunately that means his version will never be as good. He doesn't even look the part to me, with his grey bread vs. Richard's white version.

Having never read a Potter book, I have to agree that Harris fit the role better. Gambon is a tad bit creepy to me whereas Harris always felt like a grandfatherly figure who was honestly concerned for Harry's well-being.

[Shockeye]

I liked the movie, but not as much as the last. I'm assuming there was a shitton cut from the book in order to get this to 2.5 hours, which I felt hurt the feeling of it being a school year. The last three movies I got the feeling they were in school for another year, but this one not so much. Too much was focused on the Tri-Wizard tournament, but it had to be in order to get it all in there I suppose. What was the other Hogwarts contestant, Cedric? Too bad about him. He seemed like a nice guy. Emma Watson is going to be hottie mchothot in a few more years.

[stray]

Hmm...I didn't know Richard Harris was in one of these. All the more reason to watch them, I think.

[WayAbvPar]

Dumbledore, with the transition of actors, is not being played to the pattern we've seen in the books. I have a problem with him in this movie. He's a little off and I can't put my finger on why.

Richard Harris *was* Dumbledore. Presumably Michael Gambon is intentionally not trying to mimic Richard Harris's portrayal which is understandable but unfortunately that means his version will never be as good. He doesn't even look the part to me, with his grey bread vs. Richard's white version.

Having never read a Potter book, I have to agree that Harris fit the role better. Gambon is a tad bit creepy to me whereas Harris always felt like a grandfatherly figure who was honestly concerned for Harry's well-being.

Part of that is the actor, but I think part of it is purposeful- Dumbledore begins to distance himself from Harry in the later books for reasons I won't mention in deference for those of you who have yet to read them.

Saw GoF Friday night. By the time the goddamned commercials and previews were done, I was about ready to walk out (it was like 20-30 minutes worth of shit, after standing in line in the cold for a fucking hour. Just start the goddamned movie already!). However, as soon as the movie started, I was entertained the entire time. Well paced, interesting, and fun. They did cut out a lot from the books, but nothing major that can't be spliced in to the next movie if they are integral to the plot.

Oh, and Emma Watson needs to eat a sandwich or twelve. The girl looks anorexic. That said, I couldn't help but notice that she was <ahem> more noticeable in the 3rd dimension this time around, if you take my meaning. She is gonna be majorly hot. To steal a quote from "Dazed and Confused"- that is the best thing about high school girls. No matter how old I get, they stay the same age! 

[HaemishM]

Should I feel bad about having not seen any of the Harry Potter movies, nor having read any of the books?

No. I sure don't.

[WayAbvPar]

You are really missing out. Popular or not, they are pretty high quality entertainment.

[Samwise]

You are really missing out. Popular or not, they are pretty high quality entertainment.

What he said.  I resisted them for years because they were so popular, and I figured anything that popular had to be crap.  I think Harry Potter is the exception that proves the rule.

Most of the people I know expressed skepticism and/or contempt for the Harry Potter series before reading any of the books.  I do not know a single person who felt that way who did not then do a complete 180 after finally reading one of them.

[stray]

I don't resist them because they're popular. I don't mind popular. I just resist them because it's fantasy literature (especially considering that it's fantasy literature originally targetted towards adolescents). No offense, Sam (since you take Samwise as your board name), but I didn't even like LotR (I barely liked the movies either, but I at least got further with those than with the books).

[Roac]

What he said.  I resisted them for years because they were so popular, and I figured anything that popular had to be crap.  I think Harry Potter is the exception that proves the rule.

Most of the people I know expressed skepticism and/or contempt for the Harry Potter series before reading any of the books.  I do not know a single person who felt that way who did not then do a complete 180 after finally reading one of them.

Yeah, put me in the "resist until read" category.  I finally broke down, and just finished reading the whole series over about three weeks.   I will say that her writing style often bugs the hell out of me, but overall very entertaining.  Which, all told, is good enough.

[HaemishM]

I saw most of the first movie and while I didn't dislike it, I didn't like it enough to seek out the books, or make the time for it out of the other things I want to read or watch.

[UnwashedMasses]

Not sure if this movie had a chance given the source material.

That isn't to say the book (GoF) is bad, because it isn't bad.  In fact, most Potter fans seem to like it quite well, even compared to others in the series.  The book just presents a lot of problems in translation to the screen: 

    1.) About three too many subplots that provide tempo for the book are left out in the film.  I understand that we can't make a movie that lasts four hours, but I wind up craving a Ritalin after watching Goblet of Fire.  Plot is pounded out in exposition scenes to allow time for Sixteen Candles at the Christmas Ball, extended CG dragon-time, and general poutiness to establish adolescence.  This would be a better movie if it wasn't for the Tri-Wizard tournament mechanic constantly interrupting.

    2.) It is hard to establish a sense of dread in the film.  Every main character seems scared, even Dumbledore, but we keep right on with the business of another year at Hogwarts.  Until somebody dies.  Yet by the time we meet Voldemort, the movie is over.  The Tri-Wizard tournament does not seem any more dangerous than anything else that happens at Hogwarts, but there is much trembling.

    3.)  Finally, we have yet another Defense of Dark Arts teacher who is not what he seems.  A repeat in plot mechanic is more forgiveable when it is 700 pages apart than when I sit in the theatre and say, "Just like last year, and the year before, and the year before, and the year before."  New modus, please.


    Overall, this movie did not have the chance to be what Azkaban was, even before the first scene was shot.  The dementors, Sirius Black, etc made that movie the quintessential Potter film in my mind, even if was not the best book of the series.

[Shockeye]

This would be a better movie if it wasn't for the Tri-Wizard tournament mechanic constantly interrupting.

I can very well believe that since I didn't feel like I was seeing another year at Hogwarts so much as the Tri-Wizard contest that really wasn't all that captivating.

[Johny Cee]

This would be a better movie if it wasn't for the Tri-Wizard tournament mechanic constantly interrupting.

I can very well believe that since I didn't feel like I was seeing another year at Hogwarts so much as the Tri-Wizard contest that really wasn't all that captivating.

The film had the same problem the books had:  now that the larger Voldemort plot is moving,  the school plot is too much.  Rowlings has pretty much dropped the typical school "Quiddich, House Cup, studying" crap,  or would be faced with 1000 page plus novels.

The last two movies have been truer to the spirit of the books,  while the first two were to text if somewhat soulless.

To bring up a Boog criticism of The Lord of the Rings movies:  cuts have to be made,  but the cuts you make in the early movies are going to have radical implications for the latter ones. 

Cutting alot of the Maxine/Hagrid plot,  the Fleur/Ron's brother plot, the whole mess with Percy (Ron's slightly older brother who worked for Barty Crouch and goes slightly rogue), and the Snape/Deatheater plot is going to bite later directors in the ass.  Some of it will come off like deus ex machina simply because the setup is ignored.

[Rasix]

Cutting alot of the Maxine/Hagrid plot,  the Fleur/Ron's brother plot, the whole mess with Percy (Ron's slightly older brother who worked for Barty Crouch and goes slightly rogue), and the Snape/Deatheater plot is going to bite later directors in the ass.  Some of it will come off like deus ex machina simply because the setup is ignored.

I think the only significant cut there is Percy.  Even then, he really doesn't make a radical impact on the plot of the books.  You can have book 5 & 6 without Percy, IMO.

Really, they at least somewhat addressed Hagrid/Maxine and Snape as a deatheater. The Hagrid/Giant plot and Snape "betrayal" are still very much in play. I don't think Bill/Fleur is even touched upon until book 5 and uhh.. there's no movie of that yet.  Even so, her only major contribution from now is a few scenes at Ron's house.   

If anything though, yes, they should have been drawing more attention to Snape this movie.  The Order of Phoenix and Half-blood Prince plots though, bring him in heavily.  If anything, Phoenix should bring him out a little more.  I'm willing to give them a chance, even if they did spend 10 minutes too long with Harry avoiding the stupid dragon.

[Roac]

Rowlings has pretty much dropped the typical school "Quiddich, House Cup, studying" crap,  or would be faced with 1000 page plus novels.

She had half dropped that by book 3, and pretty much for good by 4.  That she didn't sooner was one of the biggest weaknesses of book 2.  I mean, the notion of "wow, magic!" was handled in book 1; anything more was just retreading old ground.  I also get the feeling that she has started to dislike writing Quiddich into her books - she killed it in book 4, and tried to push it off in 5 and 6.  She stated on her website that she has written her last Quiddich match.  That is, that there won't be another one in book 7.