Whats your opinion on the movies??

[shesabrandybuck]

I was just wondering what you think of the movies compared to the books. I am a complete Potter fanatic (not afraid to admit it), and I use to really love to watch the movies, but now I really can't stand them. After what David Yates did to the fifth movie, it completely turns me off to them [movies].

OotP, was, in my opinion, one of the most important books out of the series. Thats probably why it was one of the longest books aswell. When Yates wanted to make it the shortest Potter movie, I couldn't believe it. The book contains so much information, and it doesnt even cross the movies. So many scenes just made me so mad. I could go on and on about all of the scenes that did make me mad, but that would be a pretty long list.

I just want to know your opinion, if you read the books, or not. :cool:

[Mari]

I liked the first movie very much. It was close to the book, with Hermoine still having frizzy hair and the kids still walking around in robes most of the time. But then they switched directors, Hermoines hair got styled and they were walking around without robes.
True, I was impressed by how they showed some effects, but the magic was lost a little bit.
I absolutely hated the 5th book, or better said, I hated the whiny Harry and the way the story was told. It got quite confusing too, but in the movies they left out some parts, making the story much clearer. But this one too had lost some of the magic of the first one.

[shesabrandybuck]

Hated the fifth book!! Wow, I thought it was great. But I completely agree about Harry, I couldnt stand him the whole way through. I thought the fifth book was kind of confusing, but not really. I believe it to be the 'information book' for lack of a better word. It gave you anwsers and everything else. In the movies, they left out so many things, I thought it was awful. Espcially the with the whole voldy and dumbledore (I almost said gandalf haha) fight scene, that was just the worst. I just think that Yates really destroyed it, and am ashamed that he is filming the next movie.

I really wish that they wouldnt make Hermione so pretty, because in the books she is suppose to be like hideous.

[tolkienfan]

I've been a fan of the books for years.

1st: My fav of the movies. It moves a little slower than the rest, and there are a few changes that I dislike. Enjoyable, not great.

2nd: Fun to watch, except for the annoying parts. Dobby was pretty good, and I like how they handled the story.

3rd: My least fav. I liked how they showed the time traveling, but that's about it. I especially disliked how they turned Malfoy into such a wimp. They made changes to make the movie more appealing to those who have not read the books (stupid jokes, Hermione girly), but made changes to the storyline so that those who haven't read the books can't follow the plot.

4th: My fav book, so I liked the movie for this reason. I think as a movie it wasn't very good. Finally Daniel Radcliff starts acting. Wish it was longer.

5th: My least fav book, so I didn't like it as much as I might have. DA, Luna, and Bellatrix well done.

I own all of the movies, and do actually watch them, so they don't annoy me as much as I think they do.

[tolkienfan]

Espcially the with the whole [spoiler]

I really wish that they wouldnt make Hermione so pretty, because in the books she is suppose to be like hideous.

I agree about that scene, actually the whole Department of M was messed up.

I think Herminone being pretty is fine. First of all, there is not much they can do, and Emma Watson does a pretty good job with the role. Second, I never got the idea that Herminone was ugly from the book. Obviously, the Slytherans thought so, and she was no beauty queen anyway. I do think that she has become a little annoying ("is that really what my hair looks like from the back?" come on, Hermione would not be worried about that just then, they could've just had her step on a twig) I wish they would start wearing their robes again, they can leave out the skirts and ties however.

[shesabrandybuck]

I own all of the movies aswell (I know all the lines, dirty habbit of mine), and I enjoy watching only some. I have to say though, the third one is my favorite movie, I thought it was really great. Except how they left out everything behind the Mauders Map, I really enjoyed reading that.

I was really upset with how my favorite part of OotP was only like two minutes long

[shesabrandybuck]

I agree about that scene, actually the whole Department of M was messed up.

I think Herminone being pretty is fine. First of all, there is not much they can do, and Emma Watson does a pretty good job with the role. Second, I never got the idea that Herminone was ugly from the book. Obviously, the Slytherans thought so, and she was no beauty queen anyway. I do think that she has become a little annoying ("is that really what my hair looks like from the back?" come on, Hermione would not be worried about that just then, they could've just had her step on a twig) I wish they would start wearing their robes again, they can leave out the skirts and ties however.

Yes, I agree with you, the robes need to be used in the movies more. But Hermione, in the book, is supposed to have bushy hair and huge teeth. I guess that doesnt mean hideous, but not exactly beautiful either.

[tolkienfan]

And Harry should have green eyes!

[shesabrandybuck]

Yes!!! That is so important in the seventh book!

[Curufin]

I'm a huge fan of the Harry Potter books as well (not as much as I am of Tolkien perhaps, but I still love them).

To be honest, I think they did a good job with the movies, especially compared to how PJ slaughtered the LotR movies. There are no huge differences between the books and the movies (although certain things are cut) and with JKR advising, they're sticking nicely to the theme and the plots.

I like the 3rd and 4th movies best, although I didn't think the 5th one was that bad either.

[shesabrandybuck]

I think that the movies are horrible interpretations of the book. I enjoy the LotR movies over the HP ones.

[Curufin]

LOL, we certainly disagree on that one!

[shesabrandybuck]

I do enjoy watching them, until they make me really mad...
And atleast the cast of LotR had some good acting. Orlando had AWFUL lines though.

I am reading the Deathly Hallows again, and I heard that they were splitting that into two movies, is that true?

[Curufin]

I've heard they were. I don't know how I feel about that.

As for the acting, I think the Harry Potter actors are starting to come into their roles. They're young, after all.

[shesabrandybuck]

Very true, their acting is really improving. I dont know how they are going to do that either if they do. I wonder how that will work out..

[Curufin]

Well, people kept coming back for LotR, but I don't know if kids are going to want the movie breaking up in the middle - especially if they're released a long time apart.

[shesabrandybuck]

Sounds ridiculous to me..
I thought that they ruined the fifth movie, explain to me why you thought it was good, and maybe I will understand and enjoy it more...

[Curufin]

Oh, I'm not saying it's the best movie ever or anything.

Just that I enjoyed it. ;)

I think that probably had to do most with the fact that I loved the book, though. Then again, I love Tolkien and hate the movies, so maybe that has nothing to do with it at all. ;)

The things I liked about it (and remember, I've only seen it once) ;)

Bellatrix. I really like Helena Bonham Carter in this role. She's a fantastic actress and I like her Bellatrix a lot. :)

Umbridge. I thought she was great. Girly and evil at the same time, just like in the book, and with all her kittens. ;)

Luna. I loved Luna. Just like I imagined her in the book.

The thing that bothered me the most is that I thought Sirius's death should have been, well, 'bigger.' But I guess it wasn't really 'big' in the book, either.

[shesabrandybuck]

Bellatrix was wonderful, and so was Luna, after everyone saw the movie, they all decided to call me Luna. haha.

I thought that Sirius's death sequence was awful. Misinterpreted, in my opinion, because in the books, it didnt necessarily say that he was 'dead' just that he disappeared behind the veil. In the movie it showed that Bellatrix hit him with the killing curse and ran away boasting about it.

Another scene was the Voldy dueling Dumbledore one. In the books they had a very important discussion before the duel, it didnt happen at all in the movies, just them talking throughout the whole thing. And also the end with Dumbledore talking to Harry, that was also important.

I was very sad about Harry seeing Snapes memory about his dad and everyone as a teenager, that was my favorite part in the book (I dont know why but James is one of my favorite characters...), and in the movie it was all of two minutes long. I dont blame them for that though, because it wasnt all that important in move reckoning, in the books it was.

[katya]

I hadn't seen any of the movies until just a couple days ago. Goblet of Fire was on TV so I watched it and then downloaded OotP right away and watched that too. I really enjoyed them, but I hadn't read the books since last summer so maybe that has something to do with it.

Link! I totally agree with you about the "Snapes Worst Memory" scene. I thought it was big because it gets really important later. It's one of my favorite scenes too.

I hated Umbridge but I guess that's what she's for (she was perfect). Still, she's so infuriating that she kind of ruins the book and the movie somewhat. The end is worth it though. ;)

[shesabrandybuck]

So totally upset HBP being moved to the summer. Atleast Twilight comes out earlier. Its not so much that i am upset about it being moved later, just the fact about all the things that they are changing.

[Coffeehouse]

So who's making the next movie? I think half of the movies so far have been *cough* interesting:p And I don't like that they keep changing directors. Why can't they just stick to one:confused:

[shesabrandybuck]

Oh, they are. Yates is doing the next film and the last two after that. I am extremely disappointed, you know, after what he did to the Order. I wish the director who filmed the third movie (prisoner of azkaban), would direct again, the third was my favorite movie...so far.

[Coffeehouse]

My expectations for the last two movies is zero:rolleyes: There's too little 'flow' from the first movie till the latest. Doesn't feel convincing at all. For example the way they have been changing how Hogwarts looks. Makes it weird.
The worst part of it are all the cool parts of the book that have been reduced to nothing. Like all the subplots inside Hogwarts castle. Shudd be more dark, unknown pathways and late nights in the library:p

[shesabrandybuck]

exactly! and whatever happened to Peeves? He is awesome. Or the kitchens?!

[Coffeehouse]

They shouldn't have left out so much Quidditch tho. Quidditch rox.

The movie have become a bit too Hollywoodish I think.. they've cut down on the dialogue that makes it interesting and upped some of the action scenes, which then appear more hollow when there's no real message conveyed in the movies. Easy trap to fall into but I thought JK Rawling would have acted on that.. but apparently not:evil:

[shesabrandybuck]

I know, i wish that she would have. She has the priviledge to be on set, and shes letting them ruin the movies. Tolkien didnt have that oppertunity!


There is going to be Quidditch in HPB, finally we get to see Ron play. Too bad they didnt show that he made the team and Harry became captain. Hopefully we will get to hear some 'Weasley is Our King'!

[Coffeehouse]

That chant is so strange. Rawling is an oddball:p

I shudd read up on the books again tho. Already I'm starting to forget the book seven plot. I like book three tho. It's the coolest storyline! When did Umbridge come anyways? Was that book five?

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

But I think Rowlings made the original error about focus. I was SOOO interested in the day to day, and Quiddich, and the campaign againat house elf slavery...and she drops anything to get onto her new idea. It's no wonder the movie directors get all ADD. Like...why change Flitwick's appearence? I mean, suck it up and dress him as he was in the last movie. You have bigger problems to solve.

[katya]

I don't care at all about Quiddich or house elves. Continuity is important to me though. I haven't seen all the movies but if I watch them closely and find things changed it'll disturb me.

[shesabrandybuck]

When I watch the movies, I am either in 'movie mode' or 'extreme scrutinizing mode'. i dont understand why they changed the appearence of the Tom, the inn keeper of the Leaky Couldron. And how did prof. flitwick become a choral teacher all of a sudden?

Rowling does seem to drop a lot of things, but they all seem to tie together in some sort. I love going back and reading the books and picking up things that seemed like nothing then and then reading another book and it has some kid of meaning. For example, in the half blood prince, harry has to hide prince's potions book. he goes to the room of requirement and hides it somewhere (i dont remember exactly where in the room), then she mentions seeing a tiara. and ta da! HUGE prop in the seventh book. not saying what if you havent read it yet, but if you have, its funny how she does those things, i love it.

[Coffeehouse]

I think that's one of the reasons I enjoy her writing. She'll put in a detail, sometimes making a big point of it, and right then and there when the reader is reading it they don't understand its significance, and forget about it, and then much later like you said brandybuck, it pops up and it's all "aaaah!":p Gotta love that, cuz that's a rare trait among authors to do it again and again without it looking unatural.

[katya]

It just shows how much she thought the plot out ahead of time, which is generally a nice thing to do. That or she just went, "Oh, let's put a tiara in here. I'll find a use for it later and pretend like I knew it all along," which is also rather clever. :)

[shesabrandybuck]

lol, i never thought of it like that. it was the same thing with the locket in the order (book, of course), when they are cleaning out Sirius' place, and Harry finds this locket that mysteriously no one can open. it becomes of great importance in the sixth book, and of course, Yates doesnt even want to mention it in the fith movie.

[Goldberry1]

I was a little annoyed with the HBP move, but oh well.

I agree that one of the main problems with the film is that there is so little flow, I think within each film and within the series.

I also think they've cut down way too far on dialogue and character development in favor of action. And in the same manner, they've cut out little subplots and characters that end up being important or playing some sort of role later on, and it seems like it will be hard to reincorporate them. For example, I think Dobby appeared only in the Chamber of Secrets movie, but he pops up again in Goblet, Phoenix, and Hallows. They've reattributed the semi-important things he does in Goblet and Phoenix, but there is NO WAY they will be able to do the same for the Hallows film!

[shesabrandybuck]

OMG I KNOW! Dobby was so so so so so so so impt in Hallows! I wonder how Yates will figure that one out...

I was extremely disappointed that Winky wasnt in the fourth book and for all we know, Ludo Bagman doesnt even exist! Some things just really irk me.

I read that they might take the Bill/Fleur & Lupin/Tonks relationships out competely. Then again, its just a rumor that I read, and I am not completely sure. I would be devestated if that were the case. Both relationships have major impacts in Hallows, and I think Yates would be making a grave mistake not to incoorperate them.

I dont see why they are splitting the last film into two parts. Why put so much effort to make the movie perfect now instead of them all? No one is going to know what they are talking about (as far as movie-goers go). I asked my friends who just watch the movies and they said that they were lost in film five. Yes, I appriciate the effort they are going through to make the DH perfect, I just dont understand why they stopped after film two.

[Goldberry1]

I dont see why they are splitting the last film into two parts. Why put so much effort to make the movie perfect now instead of them all? No one is going to know what they are talking about (as far as movie-goers go). I asked my friends who just watch the movies and they said that they were lost in film five. Yes, I appriciate the effort they are going through to make the DH perfect, I just dont understand why they stopped after film two.

A) I think splitting the final film in two, they're clearly hoping to make more profit and prolong the success of the franchise, as well as appear to and hopefully actually appease and please the fans.

B) I read this from producer David Heyman the other day (emphasis mine):

DAVID HEYMAN: They will be very faithful to the book. On of the pleasures of having the time to make two films means we will be able to go into more detail than we might otherwise have been able to do. If we had only done one film we were concerned that we might have to remove The Deathly Hallows. We never went that far but that would have been something that might have had to come out, which would have been terrible! The script is coming along well; I have read the first half of the adaptation. I have not read the second half, that should be coming in the next few weeks.

C) That would be ludicrous!

[shesabrandybuck]

O__O that would be terrible! I would probably have a heart attack if they took the Hallows out.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

I think that's one of the reasons I enjoy her writing. She'll put in a detail, sometimes making a big point of it, and right then and there when the reader is reading it they don't understand its significance, and forget about it, and then much later like you said brandybuck, it pops up and it's all "aaaah!":p Gotta love that, cuz that's a rare trait among authors to do it again and again without it looking unatural.It looks completely unnatural.

It just shows how much she thought the plot out ahead of time, which is generally a nice thing to do. That or she just went, "Oh, let's put a tiara in here. I'll find a use for it later and pretend like I knew it all along," which is also rather clever. :)Clever? It's offensive and annoying.

One of my favorite authors when I was younger was Robert Heinlein. He wrote a number of stories about how the first man went to the moon... because he was a hack...it hadn't happened and stories about it were popular. As he got older, some of his books proved popular, so he wrote sequels and prequels, and so forth.

By the time he was really older and a giant in the field, etc., he strated to write crossover books. Eventually, he had a tangled web of every character he'd ever written (as well as the ones other people had written that he liked), with a lame explanation of how that was done. Really, it was all masturbation. I didn't enjoy being brought in to watch. :(

A) I think splitting the final film in two, they're clearly hoping to make more profit and prolong the success of the franchise, as well as appear to and hopefully actually appease and please the fans.

B) I read this from producer David Heyman the other day (emphasis mine):

DAVID HEYMAN: They will be very faithful to the book. On of the pleasures of having the time to make two films means we will be able to go into more detail than we might otherwise have been able to do. If we had only done one film we were concerned that we might have to remove The Deathly Hallows. We never went that far but that would have been something that might have had to come out, which would have been terrible! The script is coming along well; I have read the first half of the adaptation. I have not read the second half, that should be coming in the next few weeks.

C) That would be ludicrous!I love that the producer makes this plan BEFORE script. yup, that's all about the money.

[katya]

I was joking, sis.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

I was joking, sis.Oops, sorry. :o

[shesabrandybuck]

How is it offensive and annoying?

[shesabrandybuck]

Anyone notice dramatic changes and huge "no-no's", in the Harry Potter movies? I'm not sure if we have talked about this....

Take Tom, for instance. The inn keeper of the Leaky Couldron. Notice him in the first movie, and then in the third. Like, wtf? Did he go to St Mungos and get plastic surgery?

In the third movie, the opening scene is Harry doing his homework under the covers in his bed. Oh, but what's this? Using the "Lumos", incantation? Underage wizards are not allowed to use magic outside of school, he would have gotten a letter from the Ministry in minutes. In the book he is using a flashlight :p

[Mari]

They are broadcasting them all in 3 days around Christmas. :D I might get inspiration for discussion ;)

[shesabrandybuck]

Haha they always do that because of the one Christmas scene in the whole movie.

[Mari]

Like Sound of Music. They broadcast it EVERY year.

[Mari]

Say, does anyone know when the next film is due?

[shesabrandybuck]

Why yes! Of course I do! 17 July, the day before my birthday!!!

[Mari]

Hmmm, so plus minus a month or so before release here... Okay, thanks! :D

[shesabrandybuck]

No problem. I can hardly wait. Half Blood Prince is my favorite book :D

[HOBBIT]

I find the movies enjoyable enough to watch, but I'm not all that into them. I could care less that the release date was moved from November to the summer. I don't think I'd care if I never saw any more Harry Potter movies.

I loved the books and I know how the story ends. My Harry Potter world is my own, not the one that the movies depict. I've never liked how Voldemort looks in the movies, for example.

Of course I usually see the HP movies on their opening weekends. And I enjoy watching them. I'm just not crazy about them. They are far far inferior to the books, it's not even funny.

The LoTR movies were epic and instant classics - great art that sits apart from the great books they are adapted from. The HP movies are missing heart and soul of the books. It's like they are cheapening the books.

I actually saw the first HP movie like 3 times in theaters. But I couldn't even fully get through it on DVD when I got it.... consequently I have no desire to own any other Potter movies on DVD - I know that I'd never watch them.

They are just milking this cash cow for as long as they possibly can.... they are making the 7th book into two movies. What a shocker. And there was talk of trying to make Tales of the Beetle Bard into a movie... I can't even imagine that working for the big screen.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

I just re-watched Chamber of Secrets. I think it's better, the further I get away from reading the books.

I agree that it's fair to compare the book/movie experiences of the two series, and I think the flaws of the translations are similar. Both books derive a lot of their charm from the small details, and those are imperfectly moved to the movies. But I think, in the end, we have to deal with the fact that the Harry Potter books are just a smaller idea than LOTR. They're not as epic in content. So when you look at them you wonder why more of the "feel" can't remain. It's like the emotional graphics card is still 8 bit. ;)

[shesabrandybuck]

I look forward to the HP movies simply because there is nothing else to look forward to in Harry Potter, after Beedle and the Bard, I don't think there is much left. I enjoy watching the movies, though, if I watch them I can't start thinking about the book, or I'll get angry. I have to pretend that I've never read the books. TOotP was the biggest dissapointment of my life (well of course thats an overgeneralization), and I hope they dont ruin HBP as much as they did with OotP...

[Coffeehouse]

I've been trying to figure out what TOotP and OotP stands for without cheating.. but I don't get it:p

Tell me!

[Earniel]

I'm assuming one of them, if not both, stand for The Order of the Phoenix?

[Coffeehouse]

Haha brilliant.. what did that take you... 10 seconds?:rolleyes:

*runs away screaming*

[shesabrandybuck]

haha, yeah they both stand for the same thing, I like to change it up sometimes :)

[The Black Captain]

Anyone notice dramatic changes and huge "no-no's", in the Harry Potter movies? I'm not sure if we have talked about this....

Take Tom, for instance. The inn keeper of the Leaky Couldron. Notice him in the first movie, and then in the third. Like, wtf? Did he go to St Mungos and get plastic surgery?

In the third movie, the opening scene is Harry doing his homework under the covers in his bed. Oh, but what's this? Using the "Lumos", incantation? Underage wizards are not allowed to use magic outside of school, he would have gotten a letter from the Ministry in minutes. In the book he is using a flashlight :p

You can't blame the directors for bad interpretations of the underage wizarding law, because, if you read the books carefully - JK Rowling herself has so many inconsistencies and plot holes around that very theme. She can do many things well and consistent in her books, but that one was her worst quality. That rule was constantly being broken.

Don't you remember in the very first book, how the Weasley twins turned Ron's teddy bear into a spider? They are only 2 years older than him, so they would be certainly underage as well. Where is the ministry in this situation?

[shesabrandybuck]

You can't blame the directors for bad interpretations of the underage wizarding law, because, if you read the books carefully - JK Rowling herself has so many inconsistencies and plot holes around that very theme. She can do many things well and consistent in her books, but that one was her worst quality. That rule was constantly being broken.

Don't you remember in the very first book, how the Weasley twins turned Ron's teddy bear into a spider? They are only 2 years older than him, so they would be certainly underage as well. Where is the ministry in this situation?

True, I'm going on the sixth time reading the books, and I am beginning to notice more and more "problems" in her books, they are actually starting to annoy me. Very good books, though, my favorite :p

[Gordis]

You can't blame the directors for bad interpretations of the underage wizarding law, because, if you read the books carefully - JK Rowling herself has so many inconsistencies and plot holes around that very theme. She can do many things well and consistent in her books, but that one was her worst quality. That rule was constantly being broken.

Don't you remember in the very first book, how the Weasley twins turned Ron's teddy bear into a spider? They are only 2 years older than him, so they would be certainly underage as well. Where is the ministry in this situation?

I am not sure, but I believe the underage trace worked not on the underage wizards per se but on their residence areas. In Weasley's house (or in the Malfoy manor) the Trace won't work at all, because there are adult wizards around, and the Ministry can't say who did the magic, the parents or the children. In Harry Potter's house he was the only wizard, so all uses of magic (even Elf-magic) were ascribed to him automatically?

[Nurvingiel]

That's right. The Trace is actually really unfair because it doesn't have any proof that the underage wizard actually did the magic he's being accused of. Not that the Ministry cares though, they're rotten to the core. (That's another thread though. :D)

When Dobby smashes a pudding at the Dursleys (third book?) Harry is blamed - a prime example of this.

Edit:
I really wish that they wouldnt make Hermione so pretty, because in the books she is suppose to be like hideous.Hermione is pretty in the books, and quite good looking when she applies loads of some sort of magical hair product to de-frizz her hair.

[Gordis]

I have recently seen HBP and liked it.

I simply must say it: Jim Broadbent played a superb, completely perfect Slughorn :) Here is another wonderful actor - such eyes....:p

[shesabrandybuck]

I have recently seen HBP and liked it.

I simply must say it: Jim Broadbent played a superb, completely perfect Slughorn :) Here is another wonderful actor - such eyes....:p

You're JOKING! You liked it?! It was so horribly terrible in my opinion, the movie did absolutely no justice to the fantastic book. Biggest disappointment ever.

[Gordis]

You're JOKING! You liked it?! It was so horribly terrible in my opinion, the movie did absolutely no justice to the fantastic book. Biggest disappointment ever.

I was a bit disappointed in the anticlimactic ending - the killing of Dumbledore could have been done way better. But the rest I liked.


What exactly didn't you like?

[katya]

I really liked some parts, especially with Malfoy, and I enjoyed watching the movie. But, after I started to remember what the book was like (it's been 2 years since i read it) I like it less. But if I pretend i never read the book, I like the movie. Well, there were still some other issues, like things that weren't explained very well (why is he the half-blood prince? etc.), plot holes, some parts of the movie dragged. I had a good time at the theater though, so I'm not complaining.

[hectorberlioz]

I really liked the movie. They did change some things, but they were less aggravating changes than in #5. The movie had that charm that the first four had, and that alone was enough to make it truer to the books than the Order of the Phoenix movie (then again, half the Phoenix book was almost unendurable).

I started out with really low expectations for the movies. I hadn't seen any of them until after I finished the series (which was in May this year). So, when I watched the first four movies I was continually surprised at how good they were. You'd think they would start messing up with Goblet of Fire, since it is such a long book, but they pulled it off great in my opinion. The biggest problem the movies face are details that seem dispensable at first, but then reveal themselves as extremely relevant. Take the Percy Weasley storyline, for example. The movies (accurately) take him out of the picture in Phoenix, but didn't bother to explain why or how in Goblet of Fire.

As for casting, I would say it's mostly very good. I'm not going to quibble about Harry's hair---that's minor, I think, for the movies. In the case of Lupin, the casting actually was better than the version I imagined.

[shesabrandybuck]

I was a bit disappointed in the anticlimactic ending - the killing of Dumbledore could have been done way better. But the rest I liked.


What exactly didn't you like?

After reading the book five times, I pretty much know the in & outs of the story. Firstly, they never really explained the importance of a Horcrux - or any other possible Horcruxes (i.e. when Dumbledore was explaining to Harry about how something from Ravenclaw & Gryffindor could be a huge possibility for Voldy's Horcruxes) - so, Harry is pretty much going into the next movie blind. They completely made up a pointless sequence in the middle of the film when they return to the Burrow for winter holidays, whatever that was it had nothing to do with the story line anyway - & was a completely useless scene. They could have turned that scene into another memory - potentially the memory that features Hepzibah Smith (I could be wrong with the name) which shows a future Horcrux. Another thing that realllllllly bothered me was that the whole importance of this book was learning all there is to know about Voldemort, his past, present, & future - the viewers still know squat about him. This is very, very, VERY crucial information for Harry in the next book on how to defeat him. I thought Dumbledore's death was all very touching but he does NOT fall out of the Astronomy tower! He'd probably be in pieces when he landed! I thought that was an absolutely awful thing to do (although I understand why they did it that way...I think) - and Dumbledore's burial was out of the film completely which was a huge shocker. That is a very important scene - firstly I think it's significant to know that Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore is the ONLY Headmaster to ever be buried on school grounds & it is the scene where Harry breaks up with Ginny. The whole film was wrong from start to finish. However, Draco was absolutely fabulous and was about the only good thing that came from this film.

[katya]

I agree Link, Draco was fabulous! (and all your other comments) I was reading some comments on a movie site or something somewhere (maybe just imdb...) and a lot of people pointed out that Ron's love life was waaay overemphasized. It was funny, at times, but they spent a lot of time on that which could have been spent on explaining more important things, like Voldemort and the horcruxes and more about the half-blood prince thing. I mean, that is the title of the movie after all, but I don't think people who haven't read the book but saw the movie have any idea about it at all. My bf (as an example of that crowd) pointed that out (and says he now plans to read the books). Maybe it's not as important as Tom Riddle, but, I'm a big Snape fan so I find it important. ;]

[Gordis]

After reading the book five times, I pretty much know the in & outs of the story.

Five times! :eek: You beat me there: I've read the books only once - last spring. No doubt you are bound to see more inconsistencies.:)

Firstly, they never really explained the importance of a Horcrux - or any other possible Horcruxes (i.e. when Dumbledore was explaining to Harry about how something from Ravenclaw & Gryffindor could be a huge possibility for Voldy's Horcruxes) - so, Harry is pretty much going into the next movie blind.
Another thing that realllllllly bothered me was that the whole importance of this book was learning all there is to know about Voldemort, his past, present, & future - the viewers still know squat about him. This is very, very, VERY crucial information for Harry in the next book on how to defeat him.
I have a suspicion that at the beginning of the next movie Harry is going to find some stored memories for his perusal, legacy of Dumbledore, including ones about the locket and the ring and how Tom finally met his family on both sides.:D It would make more sense movie-wise, because only in DH Harry et Co would act on that knowledge and it would be easier to understand and to remember if it were obtained in the same movie. I heard DH will make two films, so there will be time enough. Also it will be in the next movie when Harry would part with Ginny.

They completely made up a pointless sequence in the middle of the film when they return to the Burrow for winter holidays, whatever that was it had nothing to do with the story line anyway - & was a completely useless scene. Well... it was useless enough, but I think it was not too bad - little more to make Molly hate Bella.;)

I thought Dumbledore's death was all very touching but he does NOT fall out of the Astronomy tower!
Er... sorry, IIRC he did: both in the book and the movie. _Please check it.

and Dumbledore's burial was out of the film completely which was a huge shocker. That is a very important scene - firstly I think it's significant to know that Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore is the ONLY Headmaster to ever be buried on school grounds & it is the scene where Harry breaks up with Ginny..
I've also missed this scene, that and the appearance of Dumbledore's portrait in Director's study. Again, maybe, it will be in the next movie. I hope so.

they spent a lot of time on that which could have been spent on explaining more important things, like Voldemort and the horcruxes and more about the half-blood prince thing. I mean, that is the title of the movie after all, but I don't think people who haven't read the book but saw the movie have any idea about it at all. My bf (as an example of that crowd) pointed that out (and says he now plans to read the books). Maybe it's not as important as Tom Riddle, but, I'm a big Snape fan so I find it important. ;]
And right you are. The explanation why Snape is the Half-blood Prince is sadly lackng: Eileen Prince is not mentioned. That is a huge drawback.

[shesabrandybuck]

Er... sorry, IIRC he did: both in the book and the movie. _Please check it.


Oh, dear. Really?! That's depressing - I wish Rowling wouldn't have done that. I'm going to fetch my book in a second and check that out.

[GrayMouser]

A full week after the release of the latest movie and not one comment in the Harry Potter forum?

[Rían]

I'm too lazy to start a thread :D

We saw it - general feeling was that it was pretty slow. Some gorgeous scenery, though. And for me, Voldy just isn't as scary as before - seeing him chair a meeting made him just lose something - wait, did they have doughnuts on the table? Did he show some viewgraphs? Also reminded me of the Evil Overlord thing - that was hilarious - wonder if that list is still floating around the net ...

[Pitchike12]

I like the new movie, but the new movie is OK too.:)

[inked]

Abysmal. You really have to read this for yourself. But in all the Potter boards I've been involved with over the years, and all the discussions I have had with folks pro/con Harry, nothing ...NOTHING... quite rushes in like this.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/141433

Then, again, consider the source, I suppose, for the remarks (not the reporting).

[EllethValatari]

Abysmal. You really have to read this for yourself. But in all the Potter boards I've been involved with over the years, and all the discussions I have had with folks pro/con Harry, nothing ...NOTHING... quite rushes in like this.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/141433

Then, again, consider the source, I suppose, for the remarks (not the reporting).

:glance: "It's a plot! A plot to make us all Zionists!" :glance:

Very amused by the amount of work that went into this video-any. They can find as many horrible themes in it as they want; it won't change what the book actually centers around. Nothing! It's a kids book! They might as well be saying that my favorite children's book, Goodnight Moon incorporates the Greek paganistic views of praying to the moon.

Sorry for my rant. That was a ridiculous video.

In response to the first post, I like all the movies. They are very entertaining and I've watched them each many times. I don't really see a difference from the different directors, but then again I haven't read the books. Too much very light pleasure reading for my schedule. Too busy reading Tolkien and studying! But the movies are very fun to watch. :)

[inked]

Part two of the Hollywood version of the end of Harry Potter, uselessly prolonged, apparently.

Having divided it into two parts, they could have done Nagini’s death properly after having done Neville’s speech and torture properly. They went all Hollywood at that point and rendered a most powerful scene virtually pointless – unless you just “luv” Hollywood chase scenes as a crude attempt to build tension. The whole bit with Snape’s death by Nagini striking 3 times after the useless sectum sepra spell by Voldemort was overdone. Frankly, I’m really shocked that JKR allowed those crucial changes. They could have presented them as written without difficulty. I also found the whole tenor of the story hollywoodized (in the sense of bowdlerized) by the interactions of Lord Voldemort with the death of the horcruxes and their secondary impact on Harry. I thought it crucial in the books that Voldemort had passed beyond the capability of knowing such because of the mutilation of his own soul, in fact, I seem to recall Dumbledore telling Harry that.

On the other hand, it followed the conventions of the Hollywood action-adventure movie and one can see how the limitations of the medium limited the story. No surprise, really. And it could have been worse, I suppose. I shan’t be making a second trip to the theatre to see it. I’ll wait till I get the movie as a DVD as a gift to see it again. It unimpressed me that much.