257 replies to this topic

[JimmyBond]

The film series lost me around "Goblet of Fire." I felt they made too many sacrifices from the book to make it more cinematic, and I didn't care for some of the changes they made either.

Order of the Phoenix was decent, but I never got around to seeing Half-Blood Prince (especially when my ex told me it wasn't worth seeing, and she's as huge a fan of the books as I am). I might get around to seeing this one, er...two I suppose. But it's not on my must see list.

[Harry Potter]

Looks very reassuring. Could be one of the few blockbusters this year that really deliver.

For sure, the cast is all in place and the story is so well known within fan circles that this will roll along at a cracking pace.

I watched the trailer this morning and the hairs stood up on my neck.

The effects in the last two films have been outstanding; I hope this 'part one' will set up the climax for next November.We will all be sitting on the edge of our seats all next year

[Zorin Industries]

It will no doubt be another chapter-for-chapter retread of the book, forgetting that this is the medium of film with a different canvas that needs filling and it will be another entry lacking in cause and effect like all the others. Filming the books is not enough. You need to make the films. There is a difference.

[Safari Suit]

I challenge all fans of the series to praise this film without using the words "darker", "darkness", "darkening" or any other dark-based derivatives. You can do it guys, I believe in you!

[SecretAgentFan]

I know. It´s like the "back to Fleming"-situation.

But the films did get more serious in tone. And the "darkness"-factor is something that was considered as the only, cool and worthwile way to do any film during the last decade.

[Zorin Industries]

All that budget and Radcliffe and Watson still cannot act and still over-do every expression as if this is a school production playing to the back of the room.

The same flabby lack of restraint that saw the films degenerate is all over these last two - which should have been one film, but the series is running dry... as is the cash cow Warners have had for far too long. I wanted these films to soar, but there has been more bum notes after the other. Each of the films already has had no conclusion or resolution and these new ones look no better.

[Simon]

I challenge all fans of the series to praise this film without using the words "darker", "darkness", "darkening" or any other dark-based derivatives. You can do it guys, I believe in you!

But can I mention Poldark in the same breath?

[SecretAgentFan]

Each of the films already has had no conclusion or resolution and these new ones look no better.

But isn´t that due to the novels they are based on?

[Zorin Industries]

Each of the films already has had no conclusion or resolution and these new ones look no better.

But isn´t that due to the novels they are based on?

I don't know (or care). I read the first couple of books back in the day and sort of gave up as they were overdetailed and underwritten pulp fiction. I am pleased they turned generations onto literature and created a British pop culture phenomenom but JK Rowling is one lucky woman.

The films (particularly 2-6) have told exactly the same story....

VOLDEMORT is returning....four times...

VOLDEMORT is returning with renewed sidekicks made of up star casting and sloppy characterisation....four times...

VOLDEMORT will have a battle where the status quo is maintained at the end.... four times...

The seasons come and go with no linking to them and the school year (having Christmas trees in December is not enough)... four times...

An Agatha Christie style clue is left from the audience until the last act when all is revealed but it really is too narratively late...four times....

Emma Watson and Daniel Radcliffe cannot act STILL .... four times....

Rupert Grint looks bored and honouring a contract he signed when he was 11.... four times....

The films mistake length for quality and are mind numbingly plodding with a lazy and dated "solving crimes before teatime" mentality....four times...

And everyone who is so smug about reading ALL the books will be gleeful in telling you "yes but that is in the book"... four times....

I am watching the film adapatation of the books. Rowling should not have been involved. They are audio descriptions of the books with visuals and have very little cinematic quality, awe, magic, emotion or sweep to them....

[Carver]

Trailer looks good, though the epic music helped it along a bit. I just hope they do the story of the book justice i.e. I want to see all the brutality and tragedy that Rowling penned, transferred onto screen in acceptable fashion.

[bond 16.05.72]

I enjoy them personally, the first 2 were very pedestrian but Alfonso Cuarón really did a good job of no.3 and from then on they've been fine, no masterpieces granted but all entertaining in my book. HBP was definitely more satisfying than QOS yeah I said it.

[elizabeth]

Alfonso Cuarón really did a good job of no.3

Are you kidding? He completely left out the Quidditch Cup in which Gryffindor wins!

[DamnCoffee]

The Quidditch world cup hasn't been in any of the films. It isn't really that necessary.

[Mr. Blofeld]

The Quidditch world cup hasn't been in any of the films. It isn't really that necessary.

It's the Hogwarts Quidditch House Cup she's referring to, Mhark, not the obvious stand-in for the FIFA World Cup...

Anyway, the Quidditch World Cup should have been included in Goblet of Fire, though; all this build-up in-film, and it's a flippin' flash cut to the Weasleys dancing?!?

(I'm more angered that they could have just shifted the plot responsibilities of the post-Cup sequence to later in the film, meaning the build-up was even more extraneous...)

[DamnCoffee]

Sorry for the mistake, MBlof.

[JimmyBond]

It will no doubt be another chapter-for-chapter retread of the book,

Can't quite agree with you there. I feel the only films i the series that are a chapter by chapter retread are the first two. The following films leave so much out (that made the books great) that in turn I stopped caring about the films. While I'm sure it's true that that later films stay so closely to the books that they aren't allowed to be purely cinematic, that was never my problem with the film series, in such.

[Mr. Blofeld]

The house cup and the Quiddich cup are two different things,MBlof.

I know that; elizabeth mentioned the House Cup, in which Gryffindor wins, whereas you (mistakenly, I assume) mentioned the World Cup -- bit of a difference, Matt.

[bond 16.05.72]

Alfonso Cuarón really did a good job of no.3

Are you kidding? He completely left out the Quidditch Cup in which Gryffindor wins!

I don't care, he made the best paced and thrilling film of the series, he did what Columbus didn't have the guts to do and cut to the chase instead of the greatest hits efforts 1 & 2 were.

[Zorin Industries]

The Quidditch world cup hasn't been in any of the films. It isn't really that necessary.

It's the Hogwarts Quidditch House Cup she's referring to, Mhark, not the obvious stand-in for the FIFA World Cup...

Anyway, the Quidditch World Cup should have been included in Goblet of Fire, though; all this build-up in-film, and it's a flippin' flash cut to the Weasleys dancing?!?

But the omission of that part of the book demonstrates great economy that the Potter films do not normally exude. The opening ten minutes or so of the first film are the best ten minutes of any of the latter batch of films as they forget the books and get on with the language and benefits of film making.... then the whole thing degenerates into an audio-book with pictures.

[Goodnight]

The films have been under-cast with the kids (i.e. they are atrocious - Radcliffe is an AWFUL actor and only got the part because his Dad was the leading literary agent of the day), over-cast with the adults (The Muppet Show had less in your face cameos than that).

I thought it was just me that thought that, BTW don't forget the other two as well, they are just as bad, if not worse.

I've always wondered why they got soo many A listers to do the adult parts, it almost like they wanted to say to everyone....


'Look who we've got'.



Anyway I have to say I prefer the books to the films, mainly because of three things.......Radcliffe, Watson and Grint.

[Safari Suit]

I like when his dog pretends to be a fighter pilot... I have got the right series there haven't I?

[DamnCoffee]

Quite a bit of new footage released...






Looks pretty damn fantastic!

Here's TV Spot 2.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z6-gV58tzU

(It doesn't allow me to post more than 2 links in a post. )

[SecretAgentFan]

I agree - this one seems to shape up to be a really interesting and exciting finale.

[Mr. Blofeld]

So... I saw it in a special preview screening, last night, and I now hereby post part one of my spoiler-rific review; you've been warned:

Spoiler

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part I (and, yes, that is the on-screen title; surprised me, too...) opens with a montage; Bill Nighy practically screaming at the audience about his new Ministry (he plays Rufus Scrimgeour, but is never directly named in dialogue and looks very little like the depiction in the books), intercut with Hermione erasing her parents' memories of her, Ron standing outside the Burrow, and Harry watching the Dursleys move away for safety (our Dursley quota for this movie: One shot of Richard Griffiths (from behind, accompanied by one line of dialogue), one shot of Fiona Shaw (in the car, sans dialogue), and one overdubbed line from Harry Melling, not accompanied by any shots -- and then, they're gone).

Shortly after, we cut to the Malfoy Manor, which, surprisingly, looks almost exactly as how I'd imagined it from the book. The scene around the table, with poor Prof. Burbage hanging above it, is nearly word-for-word from the novel -- with the excepting of Pius Thicknesse, who is now at the meeting, Imperiused into complacency. Jason Isaacs (who memorably threw himself onto his knees in front of Rowling at an awards dinner, begging her to get his character out of jail) throws himself into the scene; his face thick with stubble, he cowers before the Dark Lord, furious that he's being humiliated into giving up his wand in front of the other assembled Death Eaters. Alan Rickman manages to communicate to the audience with a blank slate of a face and a glint in his eye what he's really feeling about the whole scene, while Helena Bonham Carter takes giant pieces out of the scenery with every line -- and continues to do so for the rest of the film. The scene ends with Nagini seemingly swallowing the audience whole, a shot that was seemingly made to accommodate the cancelled 3-D conversion of the film; there are several shots like it in the film, and one wonders why the filmmakers failed to remove them after the converters weren't able to complete their 3-D-ification before the release.

After a brief nightmare sequence (accompanied by a vocal cameo from Jim Broadbent), we watch as Harry wanders around the Dursleys' now-deserted house, reliving memories (sans flashbacks, oddly enough; perhaps Chris Columbus gave them for the recontextualized Mirror of Erised from OotP?) and letting Hedwig fly away... which certainly threw me for a bit, considering Hedwig's fate. The Order of the Phoenix arrive, and we get our first look at Bill Weasley (who gets a line explaining away the Greyback scars cut from HBP) and Fleur Delacour's first appearance in the films since screaming her lungs out at the end of GoF... not to mention our belated introduction to Mundungus Fletcher.

The Polyjuice segment is handled very well, although I found it odd that they decided to take as canon the one-off joke from CoS that Hermione's Polyjuice Potion didn't change their voices and apply it to all Polyjuice Potions -- even though Brendan Gleeson obviously didn't spend the entirety of GoF sounding like David Tennant with Irish laryngitis. Certainly, it helps identify the characters, such as in the Ministry of Magic sequence later in the film, but... never mind; HP movie continuity has been screwy ever since PoA, so perhaps I should give it a break. (It's certainly a tribute to the skill of every actor involved in the Polyjuice sequences, on-screen and off-, that the mannerisms of the transformed characters are spot-on, and the lip-sync matches up point-for-point -- which probably required take-after-take in the ADR booth, so, props to Radcliffe, Grint, Watson, the Phelps twins, and Poésy.)

The action in the subsequent chase is well-shot, never lets up, and -- for a fantasy film -- is modern enough that, were you to put it alongside any other car or motorcycle chase, it'd stand head-and-shoulders above it. Hedwig's death is well-handled, but isn't touched upon afterwards -- a small quibble, to be sure. Voldemort's anger at Lucius's wand breaking causes him to down several power lines -- not in the book, and probably a bit much, but it's a cool visual, for sure.

Will be getting the rest out over the next few hours or, perhaps, days; there's a lot cluttering my brain -- more soon, don't worry!

[Loomis]

I still haven't seen any of these films apart from the first one. Am I missing out? (Haven't read any of the books, either.)

[elizabeth]

My friend is going to the midnight premiere. I sooo want to go, but A. I have no ticket, and B. I have to study for ing biology. -.-

[Zorin Industries]

I still haven't seen any of these films apart from the first one. Am I missing out? (Haven't read any of the books, either.)

No. You are not missing out. The first couple or so films (with the third being the most successful film creatively) are okay and solid enough but the films have never been more than the project of being the films of the books and have no cinematic flair, sweep, urgency or economy. The story (which is a fault of the books) is heavily repetitive and stalled around Part Four so the series repeats and fails to evolve in equal measure. They also do that annoying thing of "yes, we you haven't read the books". When I go to the cinema I expect that not to matter. JK Rowling has her tired pawprints all over these films. The best thing David Hayman should have done ten years ago was to make sure she was not involved. AND don't cast Daniel Radcliffe because his Dad was a -hot agent at the time.

Despite there being some overlord dominating like a panto villain the films contain no threat. There is no HAN SOLO in carbonite peril or LEIA in Jabba's Palace motif. There is next to no jeopardy inherent in the stories. And the worst thing of all is not only that the films think they are so good with their mammoth budgets and production design but that they are little more than audio books with pictures where nothing gets left out. There is no economy or awareness these are the filmic adaptations and need to adapt the story (to pinch and drop and condense like all books have to when they become films).

If Peter Jackson can adapt and make brilliant Tolkein's hefty tomes, then you'd think Warner Bros could hire a hack to let the films soar. But they never have. The lead actors cannot act (Grint is okay but looks bored now) and Emma Watson is shambolically undercast (take away her eyebrows and you wouldn't know what the character is thinking - she's all stage school Christmas pageant, as are the films).

I will be seeing HALLOWS, but out of a commitment to friends and a dinner plan we always stick to.

[Mr. Blofeld]

JK Rowling has her tired pawprints all over these films. The best thing David Hayman should have done ten years ago was to make sure she was not involved. AND don't cast Daniel Radcliffe because his Dad was a -hot agent at the time.

His father was a literary agent, not a press or screen one; also, Rowling is barely involved in the films -- she only puts in input when continuity is involved, such as with the house elf Kreacher in OotP.

[Zorin Industries]

Yeah - a hot literary agent has a lot of clout. Don't get me wrong. His Dad gets nothing but respect from the folk who know him, I just think they missed a chance with the casting of the films from day one. Though it is hard to cast ten year olds and know if even the best ones will be any good on the day. I say that from experience.

Rowling was far too involved in the early half of the films. The scripts had to have her say-so. I wouldn't mind if that was because not all the books were out at that point but the fact the story stalled around Book and Film 3 is why the films are dull now.

Of course JK is involved in the films. They are creatively stagnant like the books.

Yes, I'm stirring like a wizard's cauldron but I think there has been so many missed opportunities in the last few films - like maybe having the boy wizard doing some wizardry in the sixth film perhaps? Just a thought.

If HALLOWS I is any good I will say as much in a few days but I have been disappointed too many times now.

[Mr. Blofeld]

Yes, I'm stirring like a wizard's cauldron but I think there has been so many missed opportunities in the last few films - like maybe having the boy wizard doing some wizardry in the sixth film perhaps? Just a thought.

I didn't really like the sixth film, but he did do wizardry; he Apparated and attempted to rescue Dumbledore from those terrible effin' Inferi.