Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Harry Potter mania... underwater in GOBLET, crew for PHOENIX, and Cuaron possibly returning to the series'

Ahoy, squirts! Quint here with a bunch of news and rumors from the world of Harry Potter. There's really only one bit of rumor to this bunch of goodness and that's about Alfonso Cuaron's return to the series. Over at the main source for Harry Potter news THE LEAKY CAULDRON they have a bit from an interview Cuaron did for the DVD release of HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN in which he talks about possibly returning to the series.

"Later on if I could I would love to come back and work on another Harry Potter film. It's a gift, it's a gift. It was one of the best years of my life, doing this film."

I'm of the opinion that AZKABAN is the only HARRY POTTER film to work completely as a movie, even if there were a few things from the book that were left out. But, hey... in the first two films we had a lot left out as well. Don't get me wrong, the first two flicks succeeded in many areas, but I feel AZKABAN is the first that actually captured the tone of the books. So, I'm all for Cuaron coming back and the fact that he's signed a 3 year deal at WB opens the door for that to happen for Book 6 or Book 7.

Over at THIS SITE you can find a picture taken during the last day of shooting of the second task from GOBLET OF FIRE, which takes place under water. It's a group shot that Radcliffe is apparently using as his Christmas card, which you yourself can get if you write to him (info on the above linked site). So, go on over the to oogle the boy wizard in his swimming attire!!! And no, I don't think that's Hermione, you sickos (I'm talking to you, Knowles!!!)

There has also been a lot of movement on ORDER OF THE PHOENIX in recent days. It seems that a relatively unknown director by the name of David Yates has landed the gig. He seems to have lots of UK television experience, but I have no handle on what kind of work to expect from him. I'm sure he must have done something special to convince WB to let him helm the next installment of this huge franchise.

Steve Kloves, who has adapted every HARRY POTTER film to date, is leaving the series as well, with Michael Goldenberg (PETER PAN, CONTACT) scripting ORDER OF THE PHOENIX, with J.K. Rowling's final approval, of course.

It's an interesting time in the Harry Potter universe, a changing of the guards as it were. I'm curious to see what a new writer and brand-spankin' new director do with the material. What do you folks think?

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Nov. 23, 2004, 6:35 p.m. CST


    by MyNameIsEnid

    blah, Yates and Newell?? Going down the tube

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 6:47 p.m. CST


    by Phildogger

    HP films are just getting better and better. Now id JK Rowling could just bitch-slap George Lucas....

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 6:55 p.m. CST

    crap, I liked Steve K's adaptations. And for the love of Jebus

    by Tall_Boy

    or the high schoolers of West Beverly. Or Sunnydale High? Seriously, who cares if they "look older" we've been putting up with it for decades, why bitch about it now?

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 7:24 p.m. CST


    by Acne Scarface

    sorry, methinks i have a tumah in me head & i'd like to laugh before i die...

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 7:46 p.m. CST

    If They Keep Releasing A new Film Every year...

    by BigTuna

    People are going to get mighty tired of Harry potter after the 4th film.

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 7:54 p.m. CST

    They NEED Gilliam

    by doughboy1110

    When will WB realize that the perfect man to direct would be Gilliam? I can only hope that the reason he's never directed is that they're saving him for #7.

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 7:56 p.m. CST


    by BillyShakes

    First off, regarding Cuaron: Now it may be because I saw th efilm in Turkey and was distracted by the Turkish subtitles, but I wasn't that impressed with the latest installment. It was a little too "Dark for Dark's Sake", if you know what I mean. I don't think he did a very good job actually directing the actors and seemed more concerned with the look. Which is important, but... Another thing that kinda bugged me was that fact that he left so much out from the book, but felt the need to add other stuff. That's kinda messed up, right there. The way I see it, y'can't cut stuff for time, but add a whole buncha junk that a) doesn't really work and b) wasn't in the source material. But that's just me. As for the thought that people would get bored of a movie every year. Kinda like they got bored of the books? Kinda like they DIDN'T? Maybe if they keep making drawn out, not-greatly edited pretty movies like the last one, but as long as they stay relatively true to the source, I don't think they can go wrong.

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 8:22 p.m. CST

    BillyShakes you crazy

    by jancola

    Azkaban is the shortest of the three by several minutes, so I would say it was the LEAST wandering of the three, and the best edited. The acting was also greatly improved, mostly because the kids have begun to grow up. In Chamber of Secrets, there was only one well-acted moment in the whole messy schlockfest, and that was when Kenneth Branagh had a scene with Alan Rickman. I just don't get you people who liked the uninspired Columbus films and didn't like the subtler masterpiece that Cuaron has made.

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 8:26 p.m. CST


    by dexter cornell

    All I have to say is I agree. Give it back to Cuaron (sp). Finally I could sit through a Harry Potter movie without wanting to shoot at the screen. Please don't ruin a successful reinvention!

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 8:30 p.m. CST


    by ryLRci

    Azkaban was pure, utter crap. I'll stress the point again that Curon sucked every element of imagination and lightheartedness of out of the movie. "Ooh, look. Hogwarts is so dirty and gritty. Must mean that this is the 'darker' of the 3." SUBTLE. I've read each of the books once and wouldn't even consider myself a huge fan and I still know that even Mr. Shiny McPerfect Columbus did a better job with the first two. When will someone get it right? Oh, and remember, Curon's the one who stressed not splitting up Goblet. Great move, Jackass. Paving the way to stripping every damn detail out of the book.

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 8:35 p.m. CST

    If Cuaron is willing, bring him back ASAP

    by xeeds

    If he was available and they went for Yates instead, they are fools. Alfonso Cuaron did such a great job on POA. Being that GOF is even darker, he would have been ideal. OTP is fairly weak in book form, my least favorite of the series, so it needs all the help it can get for the screen, it's not too late WB. Well at least sign him for HBP and Book 7.

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 8:40 p.m. CST


    by ryLRci

    In thinking about it, Mr. Shiny McPerfect Columbus was equally horrific in directing the first two and has no superiority over Cuaron's hack-job. And know, I'm not just out to get Cuaron. I love every little bit of The Little Princess.

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 8:43 p.m. CST

    The Potter films are BORING and EMOTIONLESS

    by Snarky

    but I'm not the target audience. One of my nephews loves the films and the books. I, on the other hand, have never been able to get into this movies. HOWEVER, I would pay to see a Gilliam directed Potter film. It's a bold move that the producers will never make because of his reputation. Moreover, I don't think the tone that Gilliam would bring to a Potter film would be acceptable to the producers. But it would be awesome to see.

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 9:01 p.m. CST

    Gilliam totally wrong

    by Reverendz

    Chris Columbus did an ok job, but his efforts were pedestrian IMO. Cuaron was the first to really make you feel amazed at the magic in a way Columbus never seemed to manage. All that being said, Gilliam does not have the right style at all for the HP books. I love his movies, but he would probably make the films too weird and unaccessible to mainstream audiences.

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 9:35 p.m. CST

    Yates has a movie coming out next year

    by Gheorghe Zamfir

    with Jennifer Connelly, so we'll get a taste of him before Order of the Phoenix.

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 9:46 p.m. CST

    POA was my least favorite of the HP movies

    by jawaburger

    I thought that the 1st two had a more "magic" feel to them that the 3rd just didn't. The POA left me a little empty inside. Can't wait for the Halfblood Prince book, though.

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 9:52 p.m. CST

    and is it just me, or are the posts in some semblance of order

    by jawaburger

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 11:15 p.m. CST

    Um.. nooo.. I'm not crazy...

    by BillyShakes

    I just don't think that because a film has a powerful look it's neccessarily good. Cuaron did a good job with the look, but I found that he did, in fact, lose the thread on several occasions... the drawn out swooping shots, the interminable scenes that WEREN'T IN THE BOOK (sorry... still bugged about it...) Yeah, Colombus went the easy route, but, come on, these aren't Shakespeare. They're good books that I enjoy, but... And you're right, the first two did capture the magic more than the third. I'm not asking for the director to make the same movie as the previous one, but SOME consistancy would be nice. When did Hogswart get so filthy? I thought they had house elves to clean up? What, they missed that wing? "No, Dobby. House elves MUSN'T clean THAT side of the school... They're trying to film a Tim Burton movie over there. What's that? It's not a Tim Burton movie? Then why are they trying to make it look like extra footage from Sleepy Hollow? Oh.. they're filming Harry Scissorhands? That's ok then... but stil... DON'T CLEAN THERE, DOBBY!" Meh... The acting. No. They weren't better in this. They were poorly directed. At best, he didn't spend the time needed to make it work, at worst, he wanted the performances he got. Which scares me a little.

  • Nov. 23, 2004, 11:20 p.m. CST


    by BillyShakes

    just 'cuz a film is shorter, doesn't mean it's less wandering or tighter. If anything, with this film, it seemed like they had so much material that they knew they had to cut some stuff. Fine. The problem is they seemed to lose track of what was cut and what wasn't, so they had stuff that didn't follow, leaving the audience, even those who read the book again days before they saw the movie, going "What the...? How is...? Why are they...? Huh?" Add to that my pet peeve of the stuff added at the expense of source material and this was, in fact, the worst of the three.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 12:50 a.m. CST

    Harry Potter Will Never Change

    by LucienPierce

    Let's face it people, all the Harry Potter films are practically the same. Okay Cuaron came and managed to throw in a bit of atmosphere but it still felt like a tedious film. The problem doesn't lie with the director or writer of the films. The problem lies with the firm grasp that JK Rowling has on the entire film process because she doesn't realize that it's a completely different process to writing a novel. The Lord of the Rings managed to adhere to the books but an understanding of the film making process was present, hence the changes that were made to the structure and some of the minor plotlines worked better in a cinematic context. Until Rowling can just let the writers and directors actually take a cinematic stab at the books they will continue to be tedious films. Sure they sell well, but that's to be expected since there is such a built in fan base but I for one still haven't picked up a Potter book because of the poor quality of the films and surely that's the wrong response to be getting from your films. Just a thought.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 1:32 a.m. CST

    Ok ok, Quint, not to be a smart arse or anything, but seriously.

    by TheGinger Twit

    There's just something wrong here.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 2:55 a.m. CST

    If BROTHERS GRIMM is a hit, you better believe they'll got to Gi

    by Cash Bailey

    Sure, his reputation precedes him but hopefully Rowling has the clout to make them consider the option.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 3 a.m. CST

    New Blood could spell disaster for the boy wonder...

    by HomerGator

    Ok, shoot me if you'd like, but the first two movies mirror the tone of the first two books. The first two books ARE light, and sterile. They are the books before you realize in book three that there is REAL murder and betrayal, and burgeoning love. These books are a trip through adolesence. Anyone who dislikes the fifth book has obviously forgotten what it was like to be 15. Each book is tailor made to make the reader feel like Harry does. If he's angry, you're angry, if he's bored, you're bored. The movies did the same. Columbus did an amazing job getting the wonder right in the first film, and the adventure right in the second. Then, Cauron steps in at the right moment, the time when we turn 13. The film feels and looks different because we feel and look different at that jump in age. His movie adheres to the feel of the change in the books, so step of Columbus's back for once (Yeah I hated Bicentenial man too, but give the guy a break). Now, the biggest upcoming problems are the changes. Kloves has proved to be one of the most amazing hands at adapting these novels. I know he wants to move on, but man am I worried to see someone else take those reigns, because his script is where the magic begins for these films. Newell: I don't like what I've heard from him in interviews, and I hate the idea of paring it down to two hours flat. It's my favorite book of the series, and I think he has a chance at making the first of the films that dind't make me sit in awe and see on the screen what I imagined in my head when reading the books. Now, the director no one's tlaking about that is the PERFECT choice for Order of the Phoenix is the man originally offered Azkaban: Guillermo Del Toro. He and his production designers MUST bnig the Ministry of Magic to the screen (It's so eerily similar to the Paranormal Research facility in Hellboy that I can't believe it!). His mood and tone on Hellboy is PERFECT for the "Angry" book in the series. Besides, he's good friends with Cuaron, and the films would be nice compliments.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 3:02 a.m. CST

    Gilliam should have made Hitchhickers guide...

    by TheGinger Twit

    I worry about this film.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 3:05 a.m. CST


    by HomerGator

    As for recasting the kids...unless the kids decide they want to move on, KEEP THEM AT ALL costs. First of all, they are so far just about on track with the ages as they appear in the books. Each book is another year in their life. Book/movie 1 = 11, 2 = 12, 3 = 13 and so on. They will be 17 in the last book. By that point the most they will be older than their character would be MAYBE 20...It's not a HUGE leap. ANd since they cast Hermione with an actress a year younger than the boys, she won't get any more noticeably older than them than a girl would be in real life.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 3:13 a.m. CST

    Lucien, you're exactly right

    by Snarky

    Rowling has far too much creative control, and as a result the FILMS suffer. You would think so many smart people would learn the lessons of history. This is filmmaking 101 afterall. But the fact that Rowling has been given so much control and none of the producers seem to care, can only lead me to believe that they've chosen to ignore the fundamental lesson that film requirements are vastly different than literary ones, in favor of money. The built in fan base will carry this tired franchise across the finish line, and they know it. I suspect that Spielberg passed on this project specifically becasuse Rowling was given so much creative control, but I don't know the details on that one. Just imagine these films out of Rowling's control and in the hands of Spielberg, Jackson, and Gilliam.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 3:28 a.m. CST

    David Yates directed teh absolutly brilliant State of Play

    by Pegase

    And just for that I trust him. Although it had nothing magical/fantastical/childish about it as it's a very tense political thriller but it was so bloody good, everyone who gets the chance should check it out.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 3:48 a.m. CST

    Yimou Zhang, dammit!

    by Ribbons

    I want a Yimou Zhang 'Harry Potter,' for dog's sake. Other good candidates would be Tom Twyker, Jeunet (even though I know that's a lost cause), and Terry Gilliam. This new writer has a pretty impressive resume, although I'm sure they hired him solely because 'Peter Pan' is allegedly whimsical. Fingers crossed things fall into place for 'Phoenix.'

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 4:34 a.m. CST

    I've had better Christmas cards

    by trouserpress

    If there's a scene like that in the movie I'll be very impressed.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 6:06 a.m. CST

    Azkaban was the better film

    by Silver_Joo

    I'm not a fan of the book, so I watch these films as entertainment, or examples of the genre. All I'll say is that purely in terms of cinema, Azkaban wipes the floor with the first and second. Whoever called them pedestrian nails the pace and tone of Philosopher and Chamber. Columbus makes "nice" films, they won't offend. That Cuaron has divided opinion seems to me to suggest he made a real film out of the books that could be criticsed as it took risks. Also, I don't think Rowling has done the translation any favours by being so incapable of getting an editor that will speak their mind, and not release lengthy tomes that are far too long. These books could be done and dusted in 250 pages yet she still persists in dragging it out. Her prose is not good enough to warrant all the filler.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 6:33 a.m. CST

    Azkaban+Cuaron=arthouse and less dollars$

    by ROBE

    Critics may well have liked Azkaban better than the other movies as well as arthouse loving fans but the public didn't. Azkaban had a bigger first day opening than the Columbus movies but ended up making less money at the end. Columbus is a comercial director so he is looked down on by snobbish fans while Cuaron is an arthouse director and viewed as a genius. As for allowing Spielberg anywhere near HP don't make me laugh, look at Hook and the mess he is going to make of War of the Worlds.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 7:01 a.m. CST

    Am I the only one who thinks the HP movies were boring?

    by afa

    Look, I'm a fan of the books, I have all five, but seriously, all this talk about how good a job Cuaron did with Azkaban seems exaggerated to me. Sure, he was better than Columbus, but that's not much of a compliment. I think all three movies so far have been pretty bad. People talk about how the kids acting has improved. Again, this is an exaggerated compliment. Considering how horrible their acting was in the first 2, it couldn't go anywhere but up. Even then, its only marginally improved. They still can't act. I know I know, seems mean to pick on child actors, but seriously..when your being made uber-famous, paid millions of dollars, and getting more hype than perhaps any child actor ever, I have the right to expect more of you. So far, none of the actors have impressed me, not even the adults.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 7:24 a.m. CST

    Oh and about a dumb statement

    by afa

    Considering that the last harry potter book sold MILLIONS OF COPIES. It sold 5 MILLION in the first day alone, easily making it the fastest selling book in history. All in all, there are 100 MILLION HP books in print in the US alone. The last movie made over $768 MILLION worldwide, bringing the total of the movies so far to over $2.6 BILLION. And thats only the first 3 movies. The only franchise that has made more money than Harry Potter is the Lord of the Rings trilogy. And remember, HP still has 4 movies to go (assuming all seven books will be made into movies, and considering how much money there is in it, why wouldn't they?). The five books so far have sold well over 200 MILLION copies worldwide. So to answer your rather stupid 'criticise-for-the-sake-of-criticising' question, yes ShadowInc, there are plenty of people who do still 'give a shit'.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 7:46 a.m. CST

    On David Yates...

    by 28daysearlier

    I for one can't wait to see what David Yates will do with it. He is much better known for his work on the small screen and has directed two of the best TV Drama's shown here in some time: Sex Traffic and State of Play. Check them out on IMDB!

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 7:52 a.m. CST

    Rowling's influence

    by fatpik

    I've seen a few posts about how Rowling needs to relinquish total creative control. I'm sure she would like to do that, however there is one thing holding her back. There are still more books to be written. So what would happen if she let someone take over completely and in the course of writing a screen play a plot point is hatched and used in a film that will take place in HBP or book 7? The element of surprise would be ruined.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 8:06 a.m. CST

    Gilliam totally RIGHT for the films

    by Dolmes

    His imagination seems to be endless and JK Rowling wanted him onboard for the first film, so what does that tell you!?! Was she writing the books with him in mind? Who knows back when she had nothing and was living a writers dream?!?!?! I'd love to see a Terry Gilliam Harry Potter film. At least give him on chance at it. It wouldn't lose any money that's for sure, its Harry Potter, the fan base alone will be there in droves.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 8:07 a.m. CST

    Wait, a FEW changes?

    by Anna Valerious

    I didn't like how they decided to change the appearance of two characters (Tom was NOT a creepy hunchback and for some reason, Flitwick looks younger than he did in the last two) and decided to ditch the plotline about the Firebolt being sent anonymously. So, after last night's "Samantha" disaster, let's pray that this new fellow won't screw around with everything. As for the fourth movie, I loved the Merpeople scene from the book, and I'm glad they kept it.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 9:46 a.m. CST

    After the 3rd one Cuaron should be making the rest. It was the b

    by Mr. Profit

    It was not boring and did not drag on like the rest. I feel the Potter films are just improving. Part 1 was overlong, it felt like I was watching a miniseries. Part 2 was a great improvement, but still not great. Then came part 3. The acting was good. The writing was good. The direction was great. The Quidditch game in the rain was cool. It's the only Potter film I am going to buy for my DVD collection. I like Cuaron, he proved his is no hack, Bryan Singer like director.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 10:06 a.m. CST

    Anyone who thinks the acting was better in HP 1 or 2 is out of t

    by mortsleam

    As shown in the behind the scenes materials, including on set reports, Cuaron actually made the young actors do their homework on the characters to create a real portrayal of how their character would think, feel and react in any given scene. Columbus just said, "Make this face. Now say the line this way. No, THIS way." The result is that Daniel Radcliffe has actually grown as an actor, rather than saying every one of his lines in stiff "important" monotone as in the first two movies. Look at the scene in the beginning of POA when he manifests his anger at his aunt. You really believe he's feeling these emotions, instead of aping the director's grimace. Emma Watson was great in the first movie, a natural. But she felt stiff and stilted in the second one, as the director kept asking for the same performance. In POA, she's on fire, speaking the dialog as if she's making it up on the spot. Basically, acting. Rupert Grint...well, his comedic timing has improved somewhat. As far as cosmetic changes to Hogwarts, yeah, some consistency would have been nice, but aside from the original main hall, I think most of the changes in POA were for the better. Cuaron's Hogwarts certainly matches my internal view more closely than Columbus' spit shiny perfection. So true, Cuaron could have been more faithful to the look and tone of the originals, but if they were wrong in the first place, why waste his time?

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 10:28 a.m. CST

    Domestic box office means nothing because the majority of Americ

    by Lost Skeleton

    as evident by what happened in early November...that said...Azakaban was the best Harry Potter film to date.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 10:49 a.m. CST

    Actually they are all good

    by Cory849

    I've read all the books and seen all the movies. Every movie is good and does justice to the books. And I really think the differences between the Columbus and Cuaron approaches in WAY overblown. Hogwarts simply isnt all that different from picture and to the extent that some differences exist, they are all defensible choices. Everything else said on here is just people comparing the movies to the subjective picture of the book they keep in their brain. No director - EVER - will match that guys.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 11:44 a.m. CST

    They should bring Terry Gilliam to direct a Harry Potter Movie..

    by Dead Megatron

    It would be cool..

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 11:57 a.m. CST


    by ROBE

    Mortsleam the Hogswarts of the first two movies was based on plans drawn by JKR herself so Cuaron's changes are less accurate not more. As someone else said on another board because of Cuaron we are going to end up with a patchwork of movies not a proper series. What justification was there in changing Tom the innkeeper, the Fat Lady, Whomping Willow? As for JKR having too much influence, she has several advantages over JRR Tolkien. 1. The books are still being written, we are now on book 5 with 2 more books to come, so deviating too much from the current books could completely mess up the Half-Blood Prince and book 7. 2. She is not dead and can cause trouble. Any new director should be allowed a certain amount of freedom but not to start contradicting the look of previous movies.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 12:03 p.m. CST


    by BillyShakes

    The acting. No... Rupert's scene towards the beginning, on the train. The performance was so poor, so wooden, his delivery so bad, that any director worried about performance and not just the "Art House" look of the piece would have rejected it and demanded that he do it again. Getting children to do prep work and then leaving them to do as they will only leads to amateurish performance. Actors are not there to think, they are there to do as the director says. Anyone that tells you different is an actor. Shut up, actors. Stand there, look pretty and make me cry when I want you to, dammit. And I love Grint... I think he's awesome. He was just poorly directed in this one. As for the books and the translation to film... I'm so fucking sick of this American trend of criticism that films are "slavishly like the book" and "a corbon copy of the novel" (two direct quotes from 'reviews' of "Mary Shelley's Frankenstein" and... shit... I had it right here a second ago... grr... *note to self: clean up your desk*. Annyways...). The core audience of Harry Potter... the ones that made BILLIONS OF DOLLARS FOR THE FRANCHISE... are LOOKING for the movies to be like the books, not some 're-imagining *ugh'. You want to make an art film, make one, but make your own. Don't fuck up an already established artistic endeavour. As for the Star Wars prequels compared to this... come ON... you can NOT think that those disappointments were anywhere NEAR on par with these! That whiny little bitch grows up to be James Earl Jones? James, do me a favour? Whine like a petulant prick and see if... what's that? oh, that's right... you're JAMES EARL JONES! YOU DON'T WHINE LIKE A BITCH! and you want to talk about wooden acting? Stack up Radcliffe's in ANY movie compared to Natalie "God, I still love her, even though she makes Keanu reeves look like he can emote" Portman in these. Finally, I wasn't complaining about stuff being taken out, I understand that some stuff must be cut. What I WAS complaining about was that fact that stuff was ADDED by the director at the expense of important plot details. Gah.. I've talked enough... no one listens anyway. pax

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 12:12 p.m. CST

    Rowling wanted Gilliam at the start

    by ushaped

    All you Gilliam fans need to watch the extras on the Lost in La Mancha DVD. Gilliam was asked in the film about Harry Potter. He goes on to talk about a meeting he had with WB at JK Rowling's insistance before the first film came out. Rowling has admitted that she wrote the books with Gilliams sensibilities in mind. Of course he'd be perfect for the series.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 12:57 p.m. CST

    jk is an elitist snob

    by MiltonWaddams

    it's one thing to protect your work, it's another to be a pretentious bitch that wants nothing to do with anything american. not to say we have a lot going for us, but we have SOME good directors. i like how she said she didn't like to use americans, but then casted mr. home alone for her shit. fuck her.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 3:16 p.m. CST

    Personally, I've gotten rather tired of the "HARRY POTTER" book

    by screenplaywriter

    Sure, they are fun to watch, but they are long, boring, and they don't get to the plot until the mid-section, very end of the stories. It takes so much wasted time and dialogue put in until we get to the good scenes. Also, we have those useless Qudditch matches. Enough of them! They're the same damn things all the time, a bunch of a messed-up teeth Brits riding around on broomsticks looking for a golden snitch I've seen it in 3 films I do not need to see it in one more, or 3 more. Plus, Ron is a gay little redheaded bitch. Hermoine needs to get it on with Harry soon before both of them break out in pimples. And after having Sirius Black die in the last one, Rowling needs to keep killing characters off, or have some kind of big "Matrix-STAR WARS-LOTR"-like ending.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 3:18 p.m. CST

    I'll add my name to those cries for GILLIAM!!!

    by workshed

    Cock it!

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 3:24 p.m. CST

    Also, don't bash "STAR WARS" in a "HARRY POTTER" talkback.

    by screenplaywriter

    It's totally pointless and dumb. Sure, the prequels are not for everybody, or disappointing for some, but personally I think the length and the plot of the movies are more fastpaced and better than "HARRY POTTER." I hate how slow "Harry" takes just to get off the ground and start a great film. You ass is so butt-numbed from sitting in your seat watching it that you just don't care anymore. "LOTR" will always be the best book adaptation to the screen in my opinion and "HARRY POTTER" is just a powerful woman's attempt to bank on what the old storytellers of yore did long ago and what Tolkein did long ago. She knew she needed money so she wrote about English kids which she is English and made a wizard school only for them. Why for just Brits? Why not us Americans? I mean all we see is these kids with annoying little accents doing things and protecting the world from evil and witchcraft. Sure, this is fun because now the British blokes get a person to look up to and hail as their God, but who gives a fuck. I want "HARRY" dead sooner, or later it's time to wrap the series up for good. They just become dull and eventually after the fifth film nobody will care anymore about the films. They'll eventually become worthless and people will be wondering why they spent so much time on it, their energy, or money. GO "STAR WARS: EPISODE III-REVENGE OF THE SITH!"

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 6:21 p.m. CST

    Milton Waddams

    by Ribbons

    Not sure where you're getting that information from. It's possible I missed it, but are you sure you're not just misconstruing her mandate against American actors?

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 7:47 p.m. CST

    Re: Emma

    by Itchy

    She's hot. If it were legal, I would do illegal stuff to her.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 9:45 p.m. CST

    Ok, I AM bashing...

    by BillyShakes

    Yep.. I'm going to bash the first two. (not Eps. IV and V, Eps. I and II). He's lost it. Where to begin? Yeah, MOST of the effects are amazing, but a) there are some that are AWFUL (Come on.. look at it again, objectively... admit it.) and, unfortunately, none of them filled me with the awe the originals did, even to this day. It's more effects for effects sake. JarJar Binks is one of the worst characters ever conceived of and almost unforgiveably offensive. Yeah, George, we got it. Stepin Fetchit was a character in the old westerns... we get it. That doesn't make it a GOOD character from the westerns. Honestly, the only thing that could have been worse would be an Amos and Andy homage or for him to be in Blackface. Hayden Christiansen is AWFUL and completely wrong for the character he turns into, is poorly directed, acts poorly, whines, babbles and generally annoys. There IS a difference between teenage angst and evil. And the best Jedi ever? When? When do we get to see this? Never, that's when. He's got some tricks, but... ah fuck it.. it's not worth it... I'm not gonna change your mind, so I'm not going to bother... screw it.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 11:06 p.m. CST

    Good god no, don't bring Cuaron back under any circumstances.

    by ExcaliburFfolkes

    He's a fine director of small art films, but he was and is all wrong for directing a large mainstream film like Harry Potter. Prisoner of Azkaban was easily the worst of the three films made so far. I'm extremely happy that WB has gone back in a more normal direction with selecting the directors for HP 4 & 5. The last thing we need is for the Harry Potter films to turn into another Batman debacle with the movies changing radically in tone, style, feel, and quality every time around.

  • Nov. 24, 2004, 11:21 p.m. CST

    I love when Talkbackers get on thier AICN soapbox to bash Star W

    by Tall_Boy


  • Nov. 24, 2004, 11:32 p.m. CST

    Snarky, Lucien, etc. you seem to have it backwards - J.K. Rowlin

    by ExcaliburFfolkes

    J.K. Rowling created Harry Potter and has every right to protect it in anyway she seems fit. Why exactly should she relinquish her rights? What would it gain her? If I were her (or any other author who created a fantastically successful franchise) I'd retain as much personal control as possible too. Why take the risk of letting someone else mess it all up? The issue isn't about satisfying the vanity of some director, nor about appeasing the whims of a few fanboys, it's about her protecting her work.

  • Nov. 25, 2004, 1:14 a.m. CST

    Man, I love Gilliam, almost every damn film he's made

    by Reverendz

    Hell, I'm sure what you say is true about Rowling having Gilliam in mind for directing HP. But he'd fuck it up. He would. He'd bring some crazy to it even more than what Cuaron did and people would freak their shit. It would end badly. Rowling would either have his ass fired or the studio would lose a shiteload of money as mainstream HP fans stormed the castle with torches. I love Gilliams movies, Fear & Loathing is one of my favorite movies, period. I grew up on Time Bandits. Fisher King, Brazil, 12 Monkeys, hell even Baron Munchausen are amongst my favorite movies ever. He'd still fuck it up. It would be cool, it would be dark, it would be crazy. But the suits would hate it, it would sink like a steel turd and possibly kill the franchise. Maybe I'm overreacting. But really, even when Gilliam's tried to go more mainstream and legit, he doesn't exactly bust box office records. I wouldn't mind being proven wrong, toss his ass in there for film 7, as the last one, they'd have nothing to lose and it could fit the tone perfectly. I'm just sayin the earlier books... and the fans... I dunno. I just can't see it workin.

  • Nov. 25, 2004, 1:57 a.m. CST

    This girl in the pic...

    by Doran

    Could she be the Fleur Delacour?

  • Nov. 25, 2004, 3:28 a.m. CST

    'Azkaban' was tepid at best

    by MyNameDoesn'tFit

    If I had to see the camera fly through one more thing, I was going to send something through the screen.

  • Nov. 25, 2004, 8:16 a.m. CST


    by ROBE

    JKR was concerned at first at American involvement in the the first HP movie because Hollywood has generally a poor record when it comes to making movies based on non-American novels or history in general. Hollywood will usually modernize and Americanize everything. Hollywoods racism against anything non-American was JKR concern. Do I have to start listing Hollywoods rewriting of history and novels?

  • Nov. 25, 2004, 9:58 a.m. CST

    All this talk about Star Wars has reminded me of something. Was

    by ExcaliburFfolkes

    Maybe this bodes well for David Yates (apparently also known mainly for directing on Briish TV) helming "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix". Just a thought.

  • Nov. 25, 2004, 9:58 a.m. CST


    by JaneMangle

    It's probably Fleur Delacour's sister... as she was the one Harry rescued when Fleur didn't make it! Fleur was supposed to be older than Harry, and this girl looks much younger. And to throw in my 2 cents, I agree 100% with Billy Shakes. Too much content was left out of 3 and too much added in that didn't need to be there. Although, I will say I felt the third movie did give more life to the friendship between the kids than the 1st two did. Got my fingers crossed for 4.

  • Nov. 25, 2004, 10 a.m. CST

    The girl in the picture is probably just some unknown intern.

    by ExcaliburFfolkes

    Hence the reason she's holding the clapper for marking the scenes. Why would an actor, any actor be holding that?

  • Nov. 25, 2004, 3:46 p.m. CST

    hermione is hot

    by chirpychap

    she's the best thing in the series. otherwise its poo.

  • Nov. 26, 2004, 12:05 p.m. CST

    A New Hope

    by ROBE

    Hopefully the director of Goblet will respect movie continuity (no more re-imagining), try to make Hogwarts look like an old and proud school, not a dump like Cuaron made it. Explain things properly even if it means adding 5 minutes to the running time.

  • Nov. 26, 2004, 6:42 p.m. CST

    Hey LostSkeleton - fuck you.

    by Lamerz

    From a moronic American that voted in early November. Eat a dick, asshole.

  • Nov. 27, 2004, 4:32 a.m. CST

    Azkaban was horrible no story or emotion in the entire film...

    by andrew coleman

    Where Cuaron failed was to actually grab audiences which Colombus at least tried to do. Because if you look at these movies as just movies, don't think about the books, they suck. In all three films there is no worry, the characters go through the basics everytime, something mysterious happens, stupid magic stuff, Harry and crew find the bad guy, beat bad guy, everyone is happy. All three were the same thing nothing major happened, but especially the third film, the second one at least had a decent bad guy, Azkaban had those stupid ghost things who sucked your face off, but of course Harry kicks all their asses, BORING!!! No wonder the box office keeps dropping everytime one of these movies comes out they won't make it until the seventh movie because no one will care by then

  • Nov. 29, 2004, 7:40 p.m. CST

    The danger of a work in progress

    by Cajun Lightning

    Someone earlier on the board got it right. Rowling can't give up creative control because she's still working on the series. The idea of making these films while the books are still being writen is ludicrous, because how can the film makers possibly make intelligent decisions about what shortcuts to take in the narrative if they don't know the final destination? Peter Jackson made changes to Lord of the Rings, but because he had the whole work in front of him, he could see the bigger picture. He knew the final theme and vision of the author. That way, it was more like he and Tolkien were working two different mediums towards a common goal, not just one desperately trying to ape the other. How could any film maker possibly know the difference between a Tom Bombadil or a battle of Helms Deep at this point? It would be completely possible to make one complete film out of Goblet of Fire once we fully know it's context in the bigger picture. Right now, we don't. It's just an example of Hollywood striking while the iron is hot, where if they waited a bit, they could have had some real film classics on their hands (and Rowling could finish them sooner without the distraction). I mean, this isn't Pokemon. These are books. They would have stuck around awhile.