Guest TUS_02 Posted November 15, 2002 Report Posted November 15, 2002 Lemme first start off with saying that I hated the first one. I just couldn't get into it... it was too... kiddie like. I didn't have any good expectations for this one either, but after seeing a late night screening of it... I must say that it was exceptionally good. Hundreds of times better then the first one. It starts shedding its kiddie image and you can see the start of a lot of dark things showing up. Plus, Kenneth Brannagh is... the man.
Guest starvenger Posted November 15, 2002 Report Posted November 15, 2002 Well, that's a positive for me. Dark is good.
Guest converge241 Posted November 15, 2002 Report Posted November 15, 2002 my wife loves the books and i brought her to see the first one....I didnt hate it, which is saying a lot because I hate fanatasy movies..Id say it was a passable movie experience. well be seeing this one tonight so ill see if i can make it without audible groans 2 in a row.
Guest HBK16 Posted November 15, 2002 Report Posted November 15, 2002 This is one movie I wont see this weekend. Not even for free like I ussually do.
Guest starvenger Posted November 16, 2002 Report Posted November 16, 2002 Well, I meantioned this in the Weekend Box Office thread, but I'm seeing it b/c the girlfriend wants to see it - a Doug Christie jersey-worthy event, to be sure. I only managed to make it through 1 hour of the first one on DVD, so we'll see how I do this time...
Guest Flyboy Posted November 16, 2002 Report Posted November 16, 2002 I'll probably just download it.
Guest MarvinisaLunatic Posted November 16, 2002 Report Posted November 16, 2002 Never seen the first one or read any of the books and have absolutely no reason to see this one.
Guest Flyboy Posted November 16, 2002 Report Posted November 16, 2002 I've read all the books, but I haven't seen the first one. Doesn't matter if I see the second one before the first one since I know what happens in each book anyways.
Guest Dmann2000 Posted November 16, 2002 Report Posted November 16, 2002 I just have one question for the Potter fans If Slytherin has, at best, produced stuck up asshole alumni and at worst "he whose name we don't speak", why does Hogworth's keep that House around?
Guest Kahran Ramsus Posted November 16, 2002 Report Posted November 16, 2002 I just have one question for the Potter fans If Slytherin has, at best, produced stuck up asshole alumni and at worst "he whose name we don't speak", why does Hogworth's keep that House around? *SPOILERS* . . . . . . . . . . . They never really explain it, but I get the impression that it is worth the risk. Voldemort would be the greatest wizard of all time if he wasn't evil. They always mention in the books (and they do in the movie Chamber of Secrets as well) all the virtues associated with Slytherin. Although, I certainly can't think of one great non-evil wizard (except for perhaps Snape, and even he was a Deatheater for awhile) that came from Slytherin. I imagine that we just won't here about it until later in the series or at all. Voldemort's right-hand man was in Gryffindor, but every other villain seems to be from Slytherin (except those that went to another school, like Karkaroff).
Guest ShamRock Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 Well the first one is gonna be on tonight at 8ET on HBO.
Guest dreamer420 Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 I'm taking my niece tonight and not really looking forward to it because it seems like a very long movie and it's just not something I think I can get into.
Guest Dmann2000 Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 Ebert gave it **** Which I really can't understand, I mean I saw it and liked it, but I felt the first one was more...majestic. And how he can let LOTR: FOTR stand at just ***. I usually agree with Ebert, but sometimes...
Guest Bosstones Fan Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 Ebert gave it **** Ebert gave Titanic **** as well, so that immediately invalidates his grade of this Harry Potter movie.
Guest Ravenbomb Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 I usually agree with Ebert, but after Ring=** and Usual Suspects=*1/2, I'm starting to question him. I hate Harry Potter, thats all I'll say
Guest NaturalBornThriller4:20 Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 LOS ANGELES (AP) - Harry Potter (news - web sites) is working box-office magic again, though the boy wizard couldn't quite conjure up a revenue record. "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets," the second movie based on the fantasy book series by J.K. Rowling (news - web sites), took in $28.86 million domestically on opening day Friday, distributor Warner Bros. estimated Saturday. That's about 11 percent behind the $32.3 million the first film, "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone," grossed on its opening day last year. "We're a little bit under that, but we're still going to be in the stratosphere," said Dan Fellman, Warner Bros. head of distribution. "We're on our way to a fantastic weekend." For the full weekend, "Chamber of Secrets" is expected to take in less than the $90.3 million gross of "Sorcerer's Stone," which was then a record debut, Fellman said. "Spider-Man" set a new record last spring, grossing $114.8 million in its first three days, but Fellman said "Chamber of Secrets" is on track for the third-best debut weekend ever, ahead of the $80 million gross of the current No. 3, "Star Wars: Episode II — Attack of the Clones." If the estimate holds when final numbers are tallied Monday, the Friday gross of "Chamber of Secrets" would be the ninth-best single-day haul ever for a movie. "Spider-Man" holds the top two spots on that list, taking in $43.6 million in its second day and $39.4 million on opening day. "Sorcerer's Stone" places third and fourth with $33.5 million in its second day and $32.3 million in its first. The studio's expectations were lower for "Chamber of Secrets" than they were last year, when fans feverishly awaited the first movie. "The first movie was really part of a cultural event," Fellman said. "I think `Potter' at that moment was truly at its peak. The anticipation of that film went way beyond what you'd see for a normal movie." "Chamber of Secrets" again stars Daniel Radcliffe (news) as Harry and Emma Watson (news) and Rupert Grint (news) as his chums at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. Director Chris Columbus (news) and the adult cast also returned for chapter two, including the late Richard Harris (news) as Hogwarts headmaster Dumbledore. Harris died last month after finishing the filming. With reviews and early fan reaction indicating the new movie is better than the first, Fellman said the studio hopes "Chamber of Secrets" will have a longer theatrical life and eventually exceed the $317.6 million total gross of "Sorcerer's Stone."
Guest El Satanico Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 Ebert does occasionaly fall in love with a movie that isn't great and doesn't always "get" what a good movie is trying to do, but he's usually reliable. That's alot more than can be said for alot of major critics. However the fact that he can still fall in love with a movie despite being the main critic in America is what makes him good to me.
Guest Ravenbomb Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 yeah, see: Almost Famous review. And his review of North (which I absolutely agree with) is always good for a laugh
Guest NaturalBornThriller4:20 Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 North was an excellent Film. lol.
Guest Ravenbomb Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 only if by excellent you mean STEAMING PILE OF MY ENGLISH TEACHER'S SHIT!
Guest Dmann2000 Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 And for the record I like Titanic and have no problem with it being given **** Of course Almost Famous smokes it x 174
Guest starvenger Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 OK, I watched the movie and I was kind of underwhelmed. Not having read the books, I really didn't go in with an idea of what was going on, but I was bored stiff during the first 2 hours but the last 40-50 minutes were pretty good. However I can see how this would entertain the kiddies, so I can't fault it for seemingly being marketed towards the kids like I might with some other movies coughStarWarsOnecough. CGI and FX were pretty damn good, but you'd expect that from ILM. The acting wasn't bad, but Dobby the Elf was a little too Jar-Jar during his time on screen for my tastes. The story itself didn't really appeal to me - Harry always seems to succeed where others fail, and the good guys and bad guys are pretty cut and dried - but again I can see where the kids might like it. Anyways, I'll call this a 6.5/10. A good movie to take your kids to, if you can get them to sit around for the 160 minute run time (plus previews). If you don't have any kids, or don't have a gf who wants to watch it, wait for The Two Towers to get your fantasy movie fix.
Guest Dmann2000 Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 El Satanico, is that exploding head from Scanners?
Guest El Satanico Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 Yeah i believe that it is.
Guest dreamer420 Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 Well was I ever wrong. After seeing this movie I loved it. I haven't read any of the books or seen the first movie but I thought the Chamber of Secrets was a terrific film. Daniel Radcliffe has a real gift IMO and the special effects were all top notch. I'd give it *** to ***1/2
Guest Kahran Ramsus Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 Well was I ever wrong. After seeing this movie I loved it. I haven't read any of the books or seen the first movie but I thought the Chamber of Secrets was a terrific film. Daniel Radcliffe has a real gift IMO and the special effects were all top notch. I'd give it *** to ***1/2 The books only get better as they go along too. Goblet of Fire in particular is quite dark, with several deaths (one of whom is given 'the kiss' by a Dementor, which involves the Dementor locking lips with you and absorbing your soul through your mouth), cutting off of limbs and *SPOILERS* . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Resurrection of Voldemort, using Harry's blood, which enables Voldemort to get around the protective curse that Harry's mother put on him to shield him from Voldemort (which is why Voldemort can't touch him in the first film). The book ends with the return of Voldemort, the death of a student, the Ministry of Magic not believing Harry & Snape that Voldemort has returned, and Voldemort headed to Azkaban to gain the support of the Dementors. It is very much an Empire Strikes Back type ending.
Guest Flyboy Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 *SPOILERS* In the last book, that kid dies right? I can't remember his name, but he was going out with the Asian girl that Harry had a crush on.
Guest Kahran Ramsus Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 *SPOILERS* . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cedric Diggory.
Guest Flyboy Posted November 17, 2002 Report Posted November 17, 2002 It's official... Kahran likes Harry Potter WAY too much.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now