Harry Potter Movies

[Anakin Flair 0]

Finally saw it tonight, and loved it. The one major complaint (had a bunch of small ones that didn't affect my enjoyment overall) was the lack of lines some of the characters had. Ron, Ginny, even Draco only had a handful of line throughout the whole movie.

 

And what was up with the uber-powerful Ginny? Maybe a little bit of foreshadowing? Guess I'll find out tonight, as I'm off to pick up my copy of Deathly Hallows.

[bob_barron 0]

I've now seen the movie a few times, and read the book. Back to address some points.

 

 

Mole's post from July 11-

 

 

Sirius talking to Harry in the train station.

Lestrange breaking out of jail (not to mention they said her name wrong. I always thought you didn't say strange, but the other way).

Voldy in the train station.

Sirius calling Harry James during the fight scene. And most of all, Lestrange using the Avada Kedavra against Sirius. Why do that? Just have what they did in the book, why change it?????

 

I see nothing wrong with any of the add ons. It sounds like you didn't like it just because they added it-

 

1) It shows Sirius' love for Harry, and sets up that the war is coming.

 

4) What's wrong with that? Especially since it was his last line.

It shows how close Harry had become to him, and shows how revered Harry was, because he mistook him for his best friend. And the Avada Kedavra is probably easier to understand, then some random spell as in the book.

 

Harry doing occulmency RIGHT after Dumby leaves.

Cho being the snitch (was it SO HARD to leave her friend in there?).

 

Absolutely, it would've. Why go through the trouble of establishing another character and also adding on the Cho is jealous of Harry-Hermione stuff that goes nowhere, when they can just blame it on Cho, and give a reason for why the gang shuns her.

 

Fred and George's firework shit during O.W.L.S.

 

It makes the scene more fun, that they're fucking with Umbridge during something she takes so seriously.

 

When Voldy goes into Harry's body, Harry does all that friend shit. THAT NEVER HAPPENED. WHY CHANGE IT?? Jesus.

 

Congrats on missing the whole point of the movie.

 

For the 10th time- movies aren't books. books aren't movies. It's a totally different medium. The whole movie is Harry realising he's not alone in the fight against Voldemort and that he has people who care for him and love him.

 

B+ as a movie.

 

D as a Harry Potter book.

 

Those who haven't read the book yet are going to be very disappointed. It is just sooooooooooooooo much better.

 

Noooooooooooo it's really not. I loved Order of the Phoenix and look forward to reading it along (it's a tad bloated), but I think the movie is just as good, and David Yates did an admirable job putting it all together

[bob_barron 0]

Bob have you read the book yet? No. You can't really say anything.

 

I have now! And seen the movie three times!

 

The revelation that Prof. Umbridge sent the dementors to attack Harry.

 

The two-way mirror that Sirius gives to Harry.

I totally forgot about those two things missing. Assholes.

 

Assholes? Ugh, Mole. I heard the two-way mirror thing is a factor later on, but if it was really that important, Rowling would've had them put it in, like she did with Kreacher. I'm sure it's something they could put it in the 6th movie if neede.

 

Umbridge sending the Dementors is a nice little twist in the book, but not needed in the movie. The movie does a good job enough of establishing she's really really evil without having to include every awful thing she did. They also explain the Dementors themselves by implying that Voldemort controls the Dementors.

 

The Qudditch stuff: I loved it in the book, but it doesn't work in a movie. The Qudditch scenes never looked that great, are ridiciously expensive to film and are also a pain in the ass to put together. They cut it for a reason.

[AlwaysPissedOff 0]

Having finally seen the movie, I'd call it... disappointing. After Goblet, I made sure not to have any high expectations for OOtP, but even that didn't help much at all. I have to say that Umbridge, Luna, and Snape(what little we saw of him) were exceptional and the guy who's playing Dumbledore seems to have adjusted to the role a lot better than he did in Goblet.

 

The Ministry fight was really underwhelming for the most part and Sirius's death should have been handled a lot better considering how important it was(the way they handled Harry and Lupin's reactions by muting the sound was damn good, though). The Department of Mysteries fight was really mind-boggling in how all of them escaped with almost literally no damage whatsoever(I'm not saying everything that happened to them all when the Death Eaters were chasing them had to happen, but come on...).

 

I was really digging the Voldermort/Dumbledore fight til Riddle did that stupid DBZ charging up shit when he broke all that glass and when we see Dumbledore again he's on the damn ground. I know it's really petty, but damn that makes him look weak as hell. He's supposed to be the only wizard Voldy ever feared, so he should have been standing tall all the while Voldermort's doing his impersonation of Goku and stopping all that glass with a flick of his wand before it gets anywhere close to himself or Harry.

 

I really think this movie could have used another 20 minutes or so to flesh out some things because it felt really, really rushed like most of Goblet was and almost nothing really had a chance to sink in before they jumped to something else.

 

 

[Craig Th 0]

The revelation that Prof. Umbridge sent the dementors to attack Harry.

 

The two-way mirror that Sirius gives to Harry.

I totally forgot about those two things missing. Assholes.

 

Assholes? Ugh, Mole. I heard the two-way mirror thing is a factor later on, but if it was really that important, Rowling would've had them put it in, like she did with Kreacher. I'm sure it's something they could put it in the 6th movie if neede.

 

Umbridge sending the Dementors is a nice little twist in the book, but not needed in the movie. The movie does a good job enough of establishing she's really really evil without having to include every awful thing she did. They also explain the Dementors themselves by implying that Voldemort controls the Dementors.

.

All it takes is a few lines.

 

Jeez, I guess I can't have my opinion how they butchered the book. I KNOW they can't include every little thing from the book. But it was a little mystery (to met atleast) in the book/movie and it would have been nice to include it. And they didn't. Assholes.

 

It doesn't have to be important for the later books, but it was important to THIS book. It was a mystery and it REALLLLLY showed how evil Umbridge was.

[bob_barron 0]

Yesterday, Order of Phoenix passed Prisoner of Azkaban to become the fourth highest grossing Harry Potter movie.

 

I think it sucks that POA is going to end up being the lowest grosser of the movies b/c it's not only my favourite Potter movie, but one of my favourite movies of all time.

 

I think the fact that it was released in June and had to face Shrek 2, the dark subject matter yet a PG-rating, and the fact that there's no Voldemort is what contributed to it. Still a shame though.

[bob_barron 0]

All it takes is a few lines.

 

The only scene they could've done it in is the centaur scene but that had a lot going on anyway. You can say it takes a few lines, but it's not that cut and dry.

 

Jeez, I guess I can't have my opinion how they butchered the book. I KNOW they can't include every little thing from the book. But it was a little mystery (to met atleast) in the book/movie and it would have been nice to include it. And they didn't. Assholes.

 

To me, butchering a book is not leaving things out or changing things around, but changing the way certain characters acted and changing the overall tone of the book.

 

Harry Potter and the Order of Phoenix did not do that. It cut things out and changed certain scenes, but the overall feel and tone of the book stayed in the movie.

 

It's a little mystery, and in both the movies and books they answer it. The book it's Umbridge, the movie it's Voldemort.

 

It doesn't have to be important for the later books, but it was important to THIS book. It was a mystery and it REALLLLLY showed how evil Umbridge was.

 

In the movie, Umbridge: gets Dumbledore arrested, ruins the DA, fires Trelawney, tortures Harry and eventually everyone, becomes a dictator at the school, threatens to use an unforgiveable curse on Harry, etc.

 

You can have your opinion, and I can refute it. But you probably won't like 6 and 7 since it will end up being the same thing

She's evil. I don't think having it be revealed that she sent the Dementors adds to her character in anyway.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Yesterday, Order of Phoenix passed Prisoner of Azkaban to become the fourth highest grossing Harry Potter movie.

 

I think it sucks that POA is going to end up being the lowest grosser of the movies b/c it's not only my favourite Potter movie, but one of my favourite movies of all time.

 

I think the fact that it was released in June and had to face Shrek 2, the dark subject matter yet a PG-rating, and the fact that there's no Voldemort is what contributed to it. Still a shame though.

 

That and it immediately followed the two worst Potter films which had chased away a large part of the potential audience.

[bob_barron 0]

I like Chamber of Secrets a lot more then most. I think it's because it's my favourite book and I love the story so much.

[cabbageboy 0]

I do agree that Prisoner of Azkaban is the best thus far. I'd rank them as follows:

 

1. Prisoner of Azkaban

2. Goblet of Fire

3. Order of the Phoenix

4. Sorcerer's Stone

5. Chamber of Secrets

 

I put Chamber of Secrets last since it's the one in the series that most seemed to be treading water. The first introduces everyone, the third gives us Sirius and a lot of background details, Goblet has the Tri Wizard tourney and You Know Who's return, and so on.

 

Chamber of Secrets also had Hermione incapacitated for most of the 2nd half, which hurts it.

[vivalaultra 0]

If you've read the last book, the main plot of CoS actually didn't tread water; it was integral to the story and the first appearance of...something.

Tom Riddle's diary is the first appearance of a Horcrux.

(Don't read the spoiler, Bob Barron. It'll ruin everything!) I'm in agreement with PoA being the best movie, mostly because I love Alfonso Cuaron, but it was also my favorite of the books (up till the last one). It was a real turning point in the series; in both the books and the movies, it was where the series started to get less 'kiddie' and more dark.

[LaParkaYourCar 0]

Once you read the whole series it becomes obvious that Chamber of Secrets is actually one of the most important books. Everything that happens in the final scenes with Tom Riddle and the Diary have huge implications on the last two books.

[Anakin Flair 0]

I find it kind of funny that, now adays, everybody is saying that Prisoner of Azkaban is their favorite Potter movie. Because when it came out, I remember everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY complaining how it wasn't true to the book, how they left so much out, how Cuaron was a horrible director, etc. I think that now, in hindsight, everybody has realised that the movies just couldn't be exact copies of the books like the first two were, and how the newer movies were going to have more liberties taken with them.

 

In my mind, PoA was always a great film, and remains one of my favorites to this day. And after watching all of the films, I'd say my list looks something like this-

-Order of the Phoenix

-Prisoner of Azkaban

-Goblet of Fire

-Sorcerer's Stone

-Chamber of Secrets

 

[bob_barron 0]

Order of the Phoenix passed Chamber of Secrets yesterday to become the third highest grossing film in the Harry Potter series.

 

And Anakin gets it right. The first two Harry Potter movies were word for word adaptations, so when POA came out and people discovered that GASP Cuaron changed things around, all the whiny Harry Potter fans threw a fit and complained.

 

Of course without Cuaron totally reinventing things and showing them that it's okay to leave things out, who knows what would've happened with the more recent adaptations

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

And Anakin gets it right. The first two Harry Potter movies were word for word adaptations, so when POA came out and people discovered that GASP Cuaron changed things around, all the whiny Harry Potter fans threw a fit and complained.

 

They still do. Film fans however generally consider, if not Prisoner of Azkaban to be the best of the series, at least the point where the series greatly improved.

[bobobrazil1984 0]

i wasnt really paying attention to HP when Azkaban came out - but it's definately the Empire Strikes Back of the HP movies. Total tone shift, didn't do as much money, darker - but more beloved over time because of the mythic quality and better filmmaking.

 

Frankly I love the movie, and is the only HP i'd watch again and again as a great film. The other ones are good to watch once or twice, then i forget about em and read the vastly superior books.

[Craig Th 0]

The only scene they could've done it in is the centaur scene but that had a lot going on anyway. You can say it takes a few lines, but it's not that cut and dry.

Yes it is.

 

In Sorcerer's Stone (book) Ron tells Harry "how there hasn't been a wizard who has gone bad who wasn't in Slytherin." But he explains it better and they talk about it for a little bit.

 

In Sorcerer's Stone (movies) Ron tells Harry the same thing, but REALLY quickly, when Malfoy gets put into Slytherin.

 

Simple right? Yes, they did shit like that a lot. Mr. Weasley also explained the flying memo's to Harry and it took like 3 seconds. And if you didn't pay attention for a minute, you would miss it.

 

Now, all it would have took was a few lines.

 

In the forbidden forest when H&H bring Umbridge out there.

 

Umbridge: "Now you do this to me? There is nothing here! I wish those Dementors would have finished you off like I told them to.

 

Harry: "Wait, it was you?"

 

Umbridge: (a little laugh) "Yes it was."

 

Then the centaurs come.

 

3 lines. Not very hard.

 

It's a little mystery, and in both the movies and books they answer it. The book it's Umbridge, the movie it's Voldemort

Wait, what? When did they say that Voldy sent the Dementors after Harry? And if they did, why change it?

 

I just don't see the point of leaving something like that out.

 

I think you are a fan of the movies first, then the books Bob. Which is a shame because the books are just so much better.

[ANKLELOCK 0]

I think the movie patron who hasn't read the books just assumes Voldemort sent them, but I don't think its such a big deal that they need to include a revelation that Umbridge did it, seeing as how it really fits the whole storyline of the ministry being ignorant to Voldemort's return and how dangerous their indifference can be, which really is more fitting than Umbridge sending them herself seeing as how she's not exactly a death eater or anything.

 

I think OotP was my favorite movie thus far of the series, and I have read the books. I understand that some things need to be cut from the books when adapted to the big screen because they're not all entirely condusive to film. Although I do wish the prophecy was expounded upon.

 

[bobobrazil1984 0]

I dont like the fact that Umbridge sent them because imo it moves her too much into "overtly evil" territory rather than a tyrranical person who thinks they're doing what's best for the "world", which is more realistic for people like the Ministry. The movie implies (by omission) that Voldemort sent them, and that's fine imo.

[bob_barron 0]

Simple right? Yes, they did shit like that a lot. Mr. Weasley also explained the flying memo's to Harry and it took like 3 seconds. And if you didn't pay attention for a minute, you would miss it.

 

You have to include the Slytherin thing, since that's a major part of the series.

 

The flying memos thing was just a line to get a laugh.

 

It's three lines, but as metr0man said, it changes Umbridge's character (right as she's being carted off), and it also kills her asking Harry to save them.

 

The character of Umbridge is portrayed as an evil power hungry psycho. The movie establishes this numerous times with evidence and various scenes. There's no need right before she gets taken away to be like: Look, seriously, she IS evil.

 

Wait, what? When did they say that Voldy sent the Dementors after Harry? And if they did, why change it?

 

It's heavily implied that the Dementors are under Voldemort's control. They don't outright say it, but connect the dots.

 

I just don't see the point of leaving something like that out.

 

Because it adds nothing to the movies or the characters.

 

I think you are a fan of the movies first, then the books Bob. Which is a shame because the books are just so much better.

 

You've brought this up before, and it's been refuted. I love the movies and the books a lot. I think both are tremendous works. Some books I like better then the movies, some movies I like better then the books.

 

As I've said, I think Chamber of Secrets the book is one of the best books I've ever read. I think POA is one of my favourite movies ever.

 

The books have their good and bad points, as do the movies.

[Craig Th 0]

You have to include the Slytherin thing, since that's a major part of the series.

My point was that all it took was a few lines to do it, which it did.

 

The flying memos thing was just a line to get a laugh.

Which came off really bad.

 

It's three lines, but as metr0man said, it changes Umbridge's character (right as she's being carted off), and it also kills her asking Harry to save them.

 

The character of Umbridge is portrayed as an evil power hungry psycho. The movie establishes this numerous times with evidence and various scenes. There's no need right before she gets taken away to be like: Look, seriously, she IS evil.

 

How does it change her character? She was evil in the book and evil in the movie. Like I've said about 10 times, it doesn't take much to keep it.

 

I just hate how these writers change the movies to be their own thing. No point to it.

 

Like in Chamber of Secrets, how they give Hermione Ron's lines, explaining what a Mugblood means. Why change it? No need.

 

Why did they have Hermione go into the group of girls laughing after she stupify's Ron during a DA meeting? For humor? No. They just want to change shit.

 

Its annoying.

 

[ANKLELOCK 0]

I think they did better with the "Super Hermione at the expense of Ron" thing in this film. I agree the Ron/Hermione dynamic was horrible in the third film and was one of the few things done better in the first two films. Remember Hermione hurdling Whomping Willow branches and literally slinging Harry, the hero of the books, into the passage to the Shrieking Shack? Yeah, one of the reasons I prefer Yates to Cuaron.

[bob_barron 0]

My point was that all it took was a few lines to do it, which it did.

 

But the point doesn't apply to the Umbridge plot point. Evil wizards being in Slytherin? Kind of important. Umbridge and the Dementors? Not so much.

 

How does it change her character? She was evil in the book and evil in the movie. Like I've said about 10 times, it doesn't take much to keep it.

 

Anklelock kind of covers it above. She's a woman who was a Ministry patsy who always wanted power, had it, and the whole movie proceeds to become more tyrannical the more power she gets, thus becoming full blown evil.

 

With the Dementors thing, it changes it a little bit. It's a neat little twist in the book, but it's not necessary and adds nothing to the story.

 

I just hate how these writers change the movies to be their own thing. No point to it.

 

I want to call mole an idiot, but I like my 0% warning level. So I hope with that sentence, my point remains.

 

The directors of the Harry Potter movies (and writers) should absolutely be making the movie into their own thing. I don't know how to make that more clearer. It's essential to the movies being successful.

 

Whiny ass Harry Potter fans like mole were spoiled with the first two movies. With the first one, their main concern was to just not screw it up, so they got Columbus to do a straight adaptation of the book. They had to keep Columbus around for the second one because of the short turnaround, and luckily Chamber of Secrets was short enough that they could again just copy the book straight.

 

But that's not how these movies should be made. Because....

 

wait for it.....

 

Movies are a different medium then books are. Two totally different things. You have to change it up or else you get something that's bland and flat.

 

That's why I love Alfonso Cuaron so much.

 

Like in Chamber of Secrets, how they give Hermione Ron's lines, explaining what a Mugblood means. Why change it? No need.

 

Oh no! The horror! Stop being such a bitch. Do you watch the movies just to nitpick them and go: Different from book. Different from book.

 

Newsflash: Go see a movie based on a book. Then read the book. See how many things they change. This isn't some thing that Harry Potter invented.

 

Also in the books, Harry's eyes are a different colour. OMG!

 

Why did they have Hermione go into the group of girls laughing after she stupify's Ron during a DA meeting? For humor? No. They just want to change shit.

 

I'm sure David Yates and Michael Goldenberg sat there and said:

 

How about after Hermione stupifys Ron her and a bunch of girls start giggling. It's not in the book, but we should totally put it in the movie just because!

 

Here's an idea:

 

It what girls do (stick together and giggle, especially after humiliating a boy) and it's funny.

 

You're just nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking.

[bob_barron 0]

The Ron-Hermione stuff does get to be a little much in the third film, but that's also a product of the book. There's no use buiding up Ron if he's just going to be lying there with a bum leg during the climax.

 

I do think the kill him-kill us complaint is probably valid

[hyperchord24 0]

I don't know if this adds much to the discussion, but let's not forget that the only reason these movie were made was to make money. That's it. Yeah, some people wanted to make a good movie, sure, but movie execs know that if you slap anything with the HP name and it will make money. So nitpicking about what the movies left out means nothing. Everytime you ask "why did they leave this out?" or "why did they change that?" etc, you're always going to come to one answer: because these movie don't have to be straight adaptations, or even good adaptations. They just have to make money.

[Mik 0]

I finally got around to seeing this. I know it's a few weeks too late.

 

I thought it was easily the worst of the HP movies. Not because it wasn't true to the book.. I can separate them fine. I just felt like it dragged in points. There were some very, very good scenes and bits but overall it just felt flat, to me.

[Anakin Flair 0]

The Ron-Hermione stuff does get to be a little much in the third film, but that's also a product of the book. There's no use buiding up Ron if he's just going to be lying there with a bum leg during the climax.

 

I do think the kill him-kill us complaint is probably valid

 

 

Bob, I think the point most people are making about the Ron/Hermione dynamic is that the movies build her up more than him. Hermione is given all of Ron's best lines (the Mudblood explanation, the scene in the Shrieking Shack 'You'll have to kill us to kill Harry!').

 

As for the third movie and the so-called 'Super-Hermione', that was a side-effect of the story. The books followed a certain pattern of who the featured charactes at the end are-

 

Sorcerer's Stone- The Trio

Chamber of Secrets- Harry and Ron

PoA- Harry and Hermione

Goblet of Fire- Harry

Order of the Phoenix- The Trio, Neville, Luna and Ginny

HBP- Harry and Dumbledore

Deathly Hallows- the Trio, then Harry alone.

 

These patterns translated into the films, and so I never got why people got so upset at Hermione in PoA. Asides from being stressed out, she was exactly like she was in the book.

[Slayer 0]

Watched OOTP yesterday. Just going by the movie itself and not comparing it with the book (which I haven't read), it was easily the worst of the series IMO. Despite not having read the book, I could tell while watching that explanations and expositions were glossed over, if not eliminated entirely, and then Mrs Slayer covered several of the omissions on the car ride home from the theater.

 

For being the shortest film of the series (ironic, of course), it also dragged in quite a few places

[Garth 0]

Finally going to see it tonight. Huzzah!

[LaParkaYourCar 0]

The Ron-Hermione stuff does get to be a little much in the third film, but that's also a product of the book. There's no use buiding up Ron if he's just going to be lying there with a bum leg during the climax.

 

I do think the kill him-kill us complaint is probably valid

 

 

Bob, I think the point most people are making about the Ron/Hermione dynamic is that the movies build her up more than him. Hermione is given all of Ron's best lines (the Mudblood explanation, the scene in the Shrieking Shack 'You'll have to kill us to kill Harry!').

 

As for the third movie and the so-called 'Super-Hermione', that was a side-effect of the story. The books followed a certain pattern of who the featured charactes at the end are-

 

Sorcerer's Stone- The Trio

Chamber of Secrets- Harry and Ron

PoA- Harry and Hermione

Goblet of Fire- Harry

Order of the Phoenix- The Trio, Neville, Luna and Ginny

HBP- Harry and Dumbledore

Deathly Hallows- the Trio, then Harry alone.

 

These patterns translated into the films, and so I never got why people got so upset at Hermione in PoA. Asides from being stressed out, she was exactly like she was in the book.

 

I don't think she was like the book at all. The stressed out factor changed everything. In the book she overworked herself to the point she was lashing out and that's why she hauled off and hit Malfoy. In the movie she's calm and collected the whole time even though she's taking twice the amount of classes as everyone else and it makes her seem super. Add on the fact that the screenwriters gave Hermione Ron's shining moment from the book. ("If you want to kill Harry you'll have to kill us first") That's why I have a problem with her portrayal in POA.