257 replies to this topic

[Mr. Blofeld]

[danslittlefinger]

Doesn't this thread belong here?
http://debrief.comma...showtopic=55267

[DamnCoffee]

Hardly. Afterall, this is a thread for a highly anticipated movie, we've had one for Public Enemies, The Expendables, Bridget Jones 3, The Green Lantern, Ghostbusters 3, Star Trek, Inglourious Basterds, The Dark Knight, Transformers 2 and Mission Impossible IV.

That thread is for pointless news articles, something that you always seem to post, even though we've had a thread set up for such things. I hightly doubt that this is, 'pointless'. Some people on here like the Harry Potter movies, myself included, and considering the franchise is nearing it's end, I think it's quite important.

So No. It doesn't belong there.

[danslittlefinger]

Hardly. Afterall, this is a thread for a highly anticipated movie, we've had one for Public Enemies, The Expendables, Bridget Jones 3, The Green Lantern, Ghostbusters 3, Star Trek, Inglourious Basterds, The Dark Knight, Transformers 2 and Mission Impossible IV.

That thread is for pointless news articles, I hightly doubt that this is one. Some people on here like the Harry Potter movies, myself included, and considering the franchise is nearing it's end, I think it's quite important.

So No. It doesn't belong there.

I posted a thread on a Christian Bale movie that some people might have found interesting. But it was stuck in there. Indeed it was the opener for the thread. (I do see OTHER movie threads still stand alone).
There was a thread of mine regarding another item regarding Daniel Craig that people discussed and it was stuck in there after it had remained a single thread since June???
Indeed, apart from one item from Jim, it contains nothing BUT my posts (which I have now erased).
That and the Tabloid Trash Bin seems to be considered my "home" by a few people and mods. No doubt if one of my threads doesn't go in one, it will the other??
Little tiresome to be obviously singularly treated in such a fashion.

But thanks for your comment about my Pierce post and no, your thread won't end up there because it's posted by you.

What is "pointless" for one may not be for another. Little discriminatory.

[Tybre]

Hallows has much more to it.

Does it, though? There's undoubtedly a lot of material in DEATHLY HALLOWS that can't just be dropped (though I daresay a lot of the aimless wanderings towards the beginning of the book could afford to be trimmed), but I do think enough could be chopped to make it into a near-3 hour affair.

We've already agreed that it was done to make money. So arguing about it seems rather pointless, but I am glad you agree that there's much to DH that can't just be dropped.

If the densely-plotted and characterized WATCHMEN can make it there with all its essential story bits intact, or the LORD OF THE RINGS flicks can manage it, there's no reason that a Harry Potter novel can't make the time constraints. It may have to be streamlined or altered a bit, but that's just how it goes.

Okay- but was Watchman or any LOTR novel 750 pages? (I know for sure none of the LOTR novels were)

The point I made was that despite the reason (money) the decison ultimately helps the novel.

Clearly you don't know the history of LOTR. The only reason it's a trilogy is because at the time when it was sent off to the publisher, the post-war price of paper was still in effect, and that was some very high price indeed. The original LOTR was called just that, The Lord of the Rings, and was over one thousand pages long. First off that's a bit of an absurdly large book. Secondly, over one thousand sheets at the cost of paper at the time, well, the book would have been so costly most couldn't afford it and those who could wouldn't buy it. So okay, maybe technically speaking LOTR isn't 750 pages because it's split up between several books, but as far as I'm concerned, LOTR is one book like Tolkien intended. And anyway 750 was a few hundred too many if you ask me. I skipped through very large chunks of the early portions of that book because it was Potter and pals doing positively buck[censored] nothing.

[DamnCoffee]

Yates 'won't recast Potter for last scene'
Friday, July 17 2009, 15:35 BST

Harry Potter director David Yates has confirmed that he will not be casting older actors to play the movie's young stars as adults.

The final instalment of the wizarding franchise, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, features a scene set 20 years in the future, depicting main characters including Harry, Ron and Hermione as grown-ups.

Speaking to MTV News, he said: "There's something extraordinary about the audience's knowledge of them when they were this high and then seeing them where they are 38.

"There's something really beautiful about that circle, so it has to be them. I think if after seven or eight movies, we recast them in that last scene - we all thought, 'No way, we can't do that'."

Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter) added that after watching the visual effects in The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button, he is looking forward to seeing the final scene: "I might get to see what I'd look like if I was 5ft 8in, which will be a thrill for me!"

[Tybre]

Not a bad decision, I guess. Personally I would just cast actors to play the older thems instead of CGI'ing 'em up, but hey, I don't call the shots. No pun intended.

Edited by Tybre, 19 July 2009 - 04:53 PM.

[DamnCoffee]

Hmmm. I see where you're coming from.

But after hearing how amazing the CGI is in The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button, I'm looking forward to seeing this. Even though, I consider the whole idea quite cheesy, BUT I'm looking forward to seeing what the production team will do.

[Cruiserweight]

Wonder if the kids they cast to play their kids will look anything like them?

[Tybre]

Wonder if the kids they cast to play their kids will look anything like them?

Is it sad that my first thought was, "Don't tell me they're going to pluck a random kid of the street, throw some prosthetics on him as a base, and then CGI in a mixed Radcliffe-Wright/Watson-Grint physique"? Honestly I wouldn't put it past them. Cinema these days seems to be CGI this and special effects that.

[danslittlefinger]

Such a pity the acting ability of Dan Rad and the other two hasn't progressed like the special effects with each movie.

[DamnCoffee]

I feel that Rupert Grints acting has improved a lot. He seems the most talented out of the bunch, imo.

[danslittlefinger]

I feel that Rupert Grints acting has improved a lot. He seems the most talented out of the bunch, imo.

Well then, it's a shame he stated in an interview recently that after the HP films are over, that his acting career will be too.

He must have the same feeling I do.
http://www.dailymail...c-stopping.html
Channelling Bond is he, with a scotch no less?

[Tybre]

I feel that Rupert Grints acting has improved a lot. He seems the most talented out of the bunch, imo.

I concur. Radcliffe is the weakest of the trio as well, imo.

I feel that Rupert Grints acting has improved a lot. He seems the most talented out of the bunch, imo.

Well then, it's a shame he stated in an interview recently that after the HP films are over, that his acting career will be too.

He must have the same feeling I do.

Well hey, not like he'll go broke any time soon.

[danslittlefinger]

I feel that Rupert Grints acting has improved a lot. He seems the most talented out of the bunch, imo.

I concur. Radcliffe is the weakest of the trio as well, imo.

I feel that Rupert Grints acting has improved a lot. He seems the most talented out of the bunch, imo.

Well then, it's a shame he stated in an interview recently that after the HP films are over, that his acting career will be too.

He must have the same feeling I do.

Well hey, not like he'll go broke any time soon.

Not the point I was making.

[Tybre]

I feel that Rupert Grints acting has improved a lot. He seems the most talented out of the bunch, imo.

I concur. Radcliffe is the weakest of the trio as well, imo.

I feel that Rupert Grints acting has improved a lot. He seems the most talented out of the bunch, imo.

Well then, it's a shame he stated in an interview recently that after the HP films are over, that his acting career will be too.

He must have the same feeling I do.

Well hey, not like he'll go broke any time soon.

Not the point I was making.

Oh I know, just saying he can afford to have his career die.

[danslittlefinger]

I feel that Rupert Grints acting has improved a lot. He seems the most talented out of the bunch, imo.

I concur. Radcliffe is the weakest of the trio as well, imo.

I feel that Rupert Grints acting has improved a lot. He seems the most talented out of the bunch, imo.

Well then, it's a shame he stated in an interview recently that after the HP films are over, that his acting career will be too.

He must have the same feeling I do.

Well hey, not like he'll go broke any time soon.

Not the point I was making.

Oh I know, just saying he can afford to have his career die.

[DamnCoffee]

Ruperts new film, Cherrybomb looks interesting.

Such a shame I can't find a damn release date online. I think that this film will show us exactly how far he will go, in terms of acting abilty.

[Tybre]

Ruperts new film, Cherrybomb looks interesting.

Such a shame I can't find a damn release date online. I think that this film will show us exactly how far he will go, in terms of acting abilty.

Wiki and IMDB say it's set for sometime this year. My bet is probably Nov/Dec.

[DamnCoffee]

I shall add it to my list for must see films of 2009.

I think it's pretty unfair to judge someone on acting if they've only done a series of movies. Harry Potter can only go so far in terms of acting ability. Granted the films are dark, but It would be nice to see a film with Watson, Grint and even Radcliffe full of rage, and in a completely different environment to Potter.

I would love to see Radcliffe in a really gritty london film like Layer Cake, just to see how he would hold up or see Grint playing a schizophrenic, homosexual drug dealer, something very different from Ron Weasley. I wouldn't mind seeing Emma Watson in the role of a crack addicted whore. These actors need something more than Harry Potter, which is why I'm highly anticipating their future work.

[DR76]

What happened to Alfred Enoch as Dean Thomas? He's one of the major characters in the second half of the story.

[Safari Suit]

I think it's pretty unfair to judge someone on acting if they've only done a series of movies. Harry Potter can only go so far in terms of acting ability.

I'm sorry but, and at the risk of being accused of "Potter bashing", I have seen Daniel Radcliffe in things outside of the Potter series and in my opinion he is truly dreadful. In fact he's just about the only actor I can think of who manages to be unconvincing even in still photographs! Maybe he will mature into a great actor but I'm sceptical. All IMO of course.

[DamnCoffee]

I think it's pretty unfair to judge someone on acting if they've only done a series of movies. Harry Potter can only go so far in terms of acting ability.

I'm sorry but, and at the risk of being accused of "Potter bashing", I have seen Daniel Radcliffe in things outside of the Potter series and in my opinion he is truly dreadful. In fact he's just about the only actor I can think of who manages to be unconvincing even in still photographs! Maybe he will mature into a great actor but I'm sceptical. All IMO of course.

I can see where you're coming from, Safari Suit.
Did anyone on here see Equus? I was told he was brilliant in that.

[danslittlefinger]

I think it's pretty unfair to judge someone on acting if they've only done a series of movies. Harry Potter can only go so far in terms of acting ability.

I'm sorry but, and at the risk of being accused of "Potter bashing", I have seen Daniel Radcliffe in things outside of the Potter series and in my opinion he is truly dreadful. In fact he's just about the only actor I can think of who manages to be unconvincing even in still photographs! Maybe he will mature into a great actor but I'm sceptical. All IMO of course.

I can see where you're coming from, Safari Suit.
Did anyone on here see Equus? I was told he was brilliant in that.

I had a friend who saw it and told me he was passable.
Not quite sure what he meant though.

[Vauxhall]

I think it's pretty unfair to judge someone on acting if they've only done a series of movies. Harry Potter can only go so far in terms of acting ability.

I'm sorry but, and at the risk of being accused of "Potter bashing", I have seen Daniel Radcliffe in things outside of the Potter series and in my opinion he is truly dreadful. In fact he's just about the only actor I can think of who manages to be unconvincing even in still photographs! Maybe he will mature into a great actor but I'm sceptical. All IMO of course.

My opinion too. He somehow managed to almost single-handedly ruin an episode of EXTRAS. No mean feat.

[danslittlefinger]

I think it's pretty unfair to judge someone on acting if they've only done a series of movies. Harry Potter can only go so far in terms of acting ability.

I'm sorry but, and at the risk of being accused of "Potter bashing", I have seen Daniel Radcliffe in things outside of the Potter series and in my opinion he is truly dreadful. In fact he's just about the only actor I can think of who manages to be unconvincing even in still photographs! Maybe he will mature into a great actor but I'm sceptical. All IMO of course.

My opinion too. He somehow managed to almost single-handedly ruin an episode of EXTRAS. No mean feat.

It's his voice that gets me and Emma's. Cut glass or what? Works for HP but for anything else?
Oh I guess that's where acting ability will come in then.

[Zorin Industries]

Ruperts new film, Cherrybomb looks interesting.

Such a shame I can't find a damn release date online. I think that this film will show us exactly how far he will go, in terms of acting abilty.

Why don't you check out the other films he HAS done?

[DamnCoffee]

Thunderpants? I'll get right on it...

[Zorin Industries]

[quote name='Mharkin' date='19 July
Did anyone on here see Equus? I was told he was brilliant in that.
[/quote]
That's not what I heard from friends who saw it or the clips I saw. Once again Mr Radcliffe seemed to be acting like the aspirational school kid allowed a lift home in his brother's mate's car. He cannot act. A classic play is not going to make much difference, but if a bad actor getting his bits out constitutes acting then where's my BAFTA?

[danielcraigisjamesbond007]

I wasn't sure where to put this, but it's an interesting piece of news:
Next year, the "Lego Harry Potter" videogame will be released!

http://www.gamespot....ws/6210603.html



In regards to the book series, I remember seeing "Sorcerer's Stone" at a school book fair when I was a kid. It looked like the only interesting thing there, so I bought it. And you know what? I LOVED it, and I still do!
I was half-way through SS when PoA came along, and I HAD to catch up.
But after I finished PoA, I was able to get all of the books when they were released! (Specifically, I got HBP as a gift for my 15th birthday.)
I can reread the entire series over and over again, and never tire of it. One of the greatest franchises in the world!