Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Series of HARRY POTTER: ORDER OF THE PHOENIX features airs on ABC and now YouTube and AICN!!!

Hey folks, Harry here - this is a really nice series of HARRY POTTER features all strung together - which has been playing on ABC Family. And is now on YouTube - as you can see below. I really love this - watch and be delighted. Here ya go, muggles....

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Dec. 3, 2006, 3:33 p.m. CST


    by Boba Feet


  • Dec. 3, 2006, 3:40 p.m. CST

    Um, Spoiler Alert

    by georges garvaren

    That is cause for my geese to bump.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 3:39 p.m. CST


    by Chris

    Maybe this one will be better. Here's hoping.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 3:42 p.m. CST

    Helena Bonham Carter!

    by pokadoo

    Hot Goth!

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 4:01 p.m. CST

    I don't know...

    by Ribbons

    ...I'm a fairly consistent proponent of the 'Harry Potter' series, but this "sense of dread" sounds like a bunch of hot air. That's the tone Mike Newell promised the last film would convey, and I didn't get that impression at all. Maybe it's just because I've read the books, but Voldemort's resurrection didn't seem nearly as important as I thought it should have. Which isn't to say I don't have respect for Newell as a filmmaker, I just think a combination of the way the films have been executed up to this point and the medium of film itself makes it harder to evoke that feeling. If this movie manages to pull it off, I'll be pleasantly surprised. On another note, the 'Harry Potter' marathon is on ABC Family right now. Anybody looking to acquaint themselves with the series can still catch the last two films.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 4:17 p.m. CST

    ...Spoiler Alert - Are you serious?

    by Fleet

    What part of "Series of HARRY POTTER: ORDER OF THE PHOENIX features airs on ABC and now YouTube and AICN!!!" do you think WOULDN'T be giving away spoilers...

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 4:22 p.m. CST

    second the spoiler arlert...

    by mattyholmes

    come on guys, sort it out.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 4:30 p.m. CST

    There aren't any spoilers

    by caltsoudas

    I don't know what you guys are talking about. There's no spoilers anywhere in those clips. The only spoiler I could spot is that you get a VERY QUICK glimpse of a sertain 'someone' approaching Bellatrix and Harry from behind in one of those clips. This film looks like it will turn out great. Helena Bonhamcarter has done a brilliant job with the demented/sexy Bellatrix LeStrange. That shot where she sticks out her tongue after shooting a spell says it all. Umbridge seems a bit of a let down to me. It just seems like Imelda Staunton is playing Imelda Staunton (but wearing pink). She hasn't bothered changing her voice to a more annoying high pitched tone like the character in the book. She looks perfect for the part though. Luna isn't how I imagined her at all, but I like this version too, I guess. She seems more like a spaced out flower child than the comically eccentric, slightly abrasive girl I imagined from reading the book.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 4:37 p.m. CST

    The 3 Leads...

    by Ribbons

    ...Daniel Radcliffe is given a lot of guff for being a mediocre actors. Maybe that's true, but I think he's probably delivered the most consistently solid work throughout the series up to this point. Watson was pretty good in 'Chamber of Secrets' and 'Prisoner of Azkaban,' but then she was completely over-the-top in 'Goblet of Fire.' And not in a "teenage girls have hormones!" way, but an "every line sounds like the climax of a Shakespearean soliloquy" way. Rupert is funny; he knows it and he plays it up, and that's probably good for Ron, but I'm not sure how good his dramatic chops are. Either way, all three are capable. I actually thought the kid who gave the best performance in 'Goblet' was whoever it is that plays Neville though. And I don't really know why I'm saying any of this. Anyhoo...

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 4:40 p.m. CST


    by Ribbons

    "a mediocre actors." B'oh.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 4:44 p.m. CST

    What I have to say...

    by Orionsangels

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 4:44 p.m. CST

    What I have to say...

    by Orionsangels

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 4:44 p.m. CST

    What I have to say...

    by Orionsangels

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 4:47 p.m. CST

    Speaking of b'oh...

    by Ribbons


  • Dec. 3, 2006, 4:49 p.m. CST

    I used to like Potter

    by livingwater

    now I find it boring, this was depressing, they shouldn't show behind the scenes footage, it just spoils the movie illusion. WB should release the trailers only: same with the DVD: too much extra information about "behind the scenes" detracts. I prefer insightful interviews are interesting.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 4:51 p.m. CST

    I know harry wears the john lennon glasses but...

    by Orionsangels

    does he need a yoko ono as well?

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 5:10 p.m. CST


    by Ribbons

    A quadruple post AND a broken link? I like your style, Orionsangels.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 5:14 p.m. CST

    nice one ribbons

    by mmm_free_wig

    I respect your usage of b'oh.. worthy of an entry in websters.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 5:21 p.m. CST

    Spoiler alert: there are books about these movies

    by purplemonkeydw

    Watch out! Is it me, or does Gary Oldham look exactly like he did in Dracula? Luna Lovegood is dead on, and I'm excited to hear that there will be thestrals!

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 5:23 p.m. CST

    Radcliffe a bad actor?

    by I Own You

    Did you see him in 'Extras'?

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 5:31 p.m. CST

    Too soon!

    by Cruel_Kingdom


  • Dec. 3, 2006, 5:49 p.m. CST


    by TheRealDilbert27

    i love shrimp and chicken

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 6:12 p.m. CST

    It's a shame it's just 55 minutes

    by rivercb

    Not gay enough! More wand please.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 6:26 p.m. CST

    How unimaginably sick of "Harry Potter" do you

    by CreasyBear

    imagine these three kids have to be by now, especially knowing they have two more to go?

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 6:28 p.m. CST

    "Not gay enough... more wand please!"

    by Ribbons

    Okay... 1) written by a woman, and 2) spoken by someone who probably adores those lightsaber movies. All fanboys are dorks. Beating up on a franchise you're not familiar with won't change that.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 7:18 p.m. CST

    It's great at only 16 years old

    by Mgmax

    He can spout the usual actor interview bullshit-- "He's a hero but he's also incredibly human," yadda yadda.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 8 p.m. CST

    snape kills dumbledore

    by roccotheripper


  • Dec. 3, 2006, 8:05 p.m. CST


    by Ribbons

    What the hell are you talking about, dude?

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 8:05 p.m. CST

    Tonks is the Sex

    by DOGSOUP


  • Dec. 3, 2006, 8:10 p.m. CST

    rocco the "what" is as interesting as the "why'

    by DOGSOUP

    So you may think you're some kind of malcontent troll warrior spoiling things to fans you think are stupid, but in reality by now most everyone knows this and those who don't may feel spoiled until they see understand why it happened. In conclusion Natalia Tena as Tonks is the sex.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 8:30 p.m. CST

    Dracula pwns Sirius Black...

    by onemanarmy

    ...but it's good to see Oldman in a villan role again. Purplemonkeydishwasher...I know you from somewhere. Weird.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 8:29 p.m. CST

    On second though...

    by onemanarmy

    Wolf:ET comes to mind for some strange reason.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 8:30 p.m. CST


    by onemanarmy

    And posts are all bass akwards.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 8:41 p.m. CST

    This will be the best of the five, without a doubt

    by performingmonkey

    All of J.K. Rowling's best writing is in Order Of The Phoenix. Now obviously they can't put all that onscreen, but this is definitely THE movie that everyone will look back on and respect the most in terms of story and character (unless they hit Half-Blood Prince out the park, of course, but the story itself for that one isn't as good). Daniel Radcliffe has improved with each movie and now here is his real test. I don't think people give him the credit he deserves actually.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 8:40 p.m. CST

    onemanarmy have you seen these movies or read the books

    by DOGSOUP

    ??? Sirius Black is no villain. Oops, I spoiled the Prizoner of Azkaban for one person out there....

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 8:59 p.m. CST


    by onemanarmy

    Nooooooooooo! I hate you! You ruined it!!! Nah, I'm kidding. I read the first 3. After that I jumped back into reading the Dark Tower series again for some reason. He may not be a villain, but they do a pretty good job making him seem like one in the first couple of films. I'll still see the movie though, so no harm done. 8)

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 9:17 p.m. CST


    by drave117

    Okay, when I first saw pictures of Luna, I thought she looked a little too normal, but I have to say her voice is absolutely perfect. She sounds EXACTLY like the voice that she has in my head. Spoooooky.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 9:25 p.m. CST

    I read them all...

    by justcheckin

    so, there really is no spoiler except to see how the movie conveys the book. I am looking forward to it.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 9:34 p.m. CST

    Damn You BCS!

    by S-Mart shopper

    Florida sucks!

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 9:42 p.m. CST


    by jedimindflayer

    totally stoked for #5; easily the best book of the bunch thus far, and i'm really looking forward to how it translates to film. kinda bummed tho- my fave part of 4 is the fred/george plotline that concludes in 5; #4 movie never addressed it, and i'm afraid i'll never see the all-time best scene in 5 play out on the screen (especially since we never got a chance to see rik mayalls' peeves). ah well.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 9:46 p.m. CST

    oh! dogsoup...

    by jedimindflayer

    would you be kind enough to put up a link to a photo of this natalia tena? i'd like to see if she is as masturbatory as you claim. personally, helena fits my mold a bit better... too bad shes' got tim burton germs

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 11:37 p.m. CST

    looks good

    by oisin5199

    all the teen actors seem to have great natural voices. My hunch is that Yates may be one of the first Potter directors that might actually let them use those voices, and not in that 'over the top' way that someone else described. I agree Luna's is fantastic (and you gotta dig Cho's Scottish). They all seem like really great personalities, that I'm hoping to see on the screen more. I think Yates might be the one to finally pull that off.

  • Dec. 3, 2006, 11:55 p.m. CST

    Gary Oldman is perfect!

    by W3bzpinn3r

    First time I read the books, I thought of Oldman for either Remus Lupin or Sirius Black. And after seeing him in "Azkaban" and the clips of "Order", he is just as perfect on film as he was in my head. I'm not a Potter fanboy, but I have enjoyed the films and books, and I look forward to seeing Alan Rickman be one slithery evil SOB in "Half-Blood Prince"

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 12:01 a.m. CST

    Behold Jedi :TONKS

    by DOGSOUP

    I do have a think for purple-haired girls though. I'm not disagreeing, HBC is way hot, I have always thought so but for some reason I'm totally in love. Natalia Tena as Tonks is the sex.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 12:24 a.m. CST

    Wow nef

    by Ribbons

    You are so awesome. Can you teach me how to be a total dick for the sake of it too? By the way, anything of substance to add to the conversation? No? Okay, just checking.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 12:40 a.m. CST

    Luna Speaks!

    by Saluki

    Wow, Luna Lovegood (is that a James Bond name, or what?) speaks and she sounds... Freakin' BEYOND perfect. She actually talks in the tone. Amazing. Having HBC is always a major plus too!

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 2:17 a.m. CST


    by sith-vol

    Best thing I've seen on AICN in ages.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 2:44 a.m. CST


    by DocPazuzu

    I'm totally with you on the acting judgment -- especially regarding the kid who plays Neville. This is especially important since I have a firm belief that Mr. Longbottom is the true unsung hero of the series, with the deepest background tragedy, and that he'll have an enormously decisive role to play in the final showdown.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 5:26 a.m. CST

    The third one good!!

    by Kristian66

    The rest are pants. Hopefully this will change that, but it really seems like more of the same. They almost make you a tad embaressed to be English.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 6:53 a.m. CST


    by Frijole

    I don't understand what you're talking about? Setting him up in the first three books? The third book/ film is the first one that he's even mentioned in. He is set up at the beginning as a villain, but revealed as nothing of the sort by the end of the book/ movie. So if you'd seen the first three movies or read the first three books you'd know this.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 11:32 a.m. CST

    I agree, all the actors are getting better

    by Novaman5000

    Though Watson was a bit much in the last movie, I think she has the most potential of the three in terms of acting ability. It's a shame there's rumors that she may not finish out the series on the last two films... I hope that's just hardball contract negotiations. I absolutely HATE recasting, plus I think she'd be throwing away a really great opportunity to complete a pretty solid film series.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Can't wait for this one.

    by butnugget

    And did you see Venom at the end??? AWSOME!

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 11:56 a.m. CST


    by Sylvia Simon

    Can't wait. And I agree with Novaman5000: recasting at this stage would be awful. Plus, you know she'd only end up kicking herself later if she didn't complete the whole series. Avoid being old and bitter Emma; see these films through.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 12:28 p.m. CST


    by Frijole

    Yeah... They've come this far. Why stop now? Honestly as long as the series is completed by the time they're all 21 or so (which it should be) then I see no reason for any of the three leads to walk. And if it's a money issue, I honestly think that WB should give them all WHATEVER they want... They're getting a bargain having stars (and face it, the kids ARE stars now) that come so cheap... and the box office effect that could come from replacing them would be huge compared to the 2 or 3 million a piece it would take to keep them all in the game.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 3:17 p.m. CST

    "the entire concept just popped into rowiling's head"

    by performingmonkey

    No, it wasn't the ENTIRE concept, the idea she came up with on the train was a boy who didn't know he was a wizard going on a train to a wizards' school, it just grew from there. You'd have to be stupid to think every single detail just came to her.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 3:21 p.m. CST

    "lotr, star wars, books of magic"

    by Finklestone

    I'm not a big Harry Potter fan, but I must admit I do love watching the insecure fanboys of other franchises pouting their lips and chucking their teddies out of the pram because they feel its huge success somehow diminishes their own personal favourite franchise.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 3:33 p.m. CST

    Bacci40, have you read the books?

    by Novaman5000

    Two major MAJOR characters have died so far, as well as a few secondary characters. With more to come before it's all over.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 3:47 p.m. CST

    frijole- they're like 16-17 now

    by Novaman5000

    in 4 years the series should be over, they'll be rich enough to never work again if they didn't want to AND they'll have a massive, famous cinematic 7-part series under their belts. I think they're crazy for even considering getting outta there.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 3:49 p.m. CST


    by Ribbons

    For someone who allegedly doesn't give a shit about Harry Potter, you're always in these TalkBacks running your mouth. It's simultaneously annoying and amusing, because you obviously have no idea what the hell you're talking about. Please direct us to more fantasy series where characters actually die.

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 4:56 p.m. CST

    Sanpe's definitely in it

    by quadrupletree

    He teaches Harry some new skills to keep Voldemort out of his mind. It's integral to the story so they have to have it in there. Don't know about Hagrid though. This looks great so far, can't wait to see this one!

  • Dec. 4, 2006, 6:04 p.m. CST


    by Ribbons

    He's in it for at least a little bit, because Grawp is in it too. So he'll have to introduce/deal with him a little. I saw a short clip on HBO's making-of special where he goes "Grawpy! Bad boy!"

  • Dec. 5, 2006, 6:48 a.m. CST


    by ROBE

    The actors cast so far is one thing the movies have got right. The only real dud of an actor cast has been Michael Gambon as Dumbledore, they should have gone for Peter O'Toole.

  • Dec. 5, 2006, 7:33 a.m. CST

    Peter O'Toole is too old...

    by Frijole

    ...and they'd be at a higher of risk losing another Dumbledore mid-stream with him. And Nova... Yep, that's exactly what I'm saying.

  • Dec. 5, 2006, 7:35 a.m. CST

    Oh, and if Coltrane...

    by Frijole

    is bitching about the length of the series, then he's nuts. I guarantee he doesn't have to work on each movie more than 2-3 weeks. So that's 2-3 weeks of work every 14-15 months... a fat paycheck... and he gets to be beloved forever as a fan favorite in one of the most successful film series of all time. Yeah, I'd be bitching too... *pfft* I love Coltrane, so I hope that isn't the case.

  • Dec. 5, 2006, 9:13 a.m. CST

    Good point Frijole...

    by ROBE

    ...but are you saying Gambon was a good choice?

  • Dec. 5, 2006, 9:18 a.m. CST


    by Frijole

    I think Michael Gambon is a great actor. I don't think he's the best Dumbledore... but he's not BAD... and certainly doesn't ruin the movies he's in (for me, at least... I know some disagree). There are aspects of his Dumbledore that I like far more than Harris's and other aspects that don't really "do it" for me.

  • Dec. 5, 2006, 1:56 p.m. CST


    by J.B.M.A.

    Have to admit that I've been deeply underwhelmed by the performances of both Harris and Gambon as Dumbledore. I always thought that what made the character most fun as Rowling wrote him was his veil of eccentricity - a barmy old codger who enjoys boiled sweets and can sometimes be found wandering the corridors of Hogwarts at night looking for the loo - only revealing his true power when needed. What we've had so far is not actually bad, but not terribly interesting either. Can't understand the need for the terrible haircuts on the kids in the new film, grow it back I say! I thought Goblet was the best adaptation so far, Mike Newell finally nailed Rowlings humour and the English boarding school stuff that has so eluded other directors. I must say I'm surprised that so many consider this book to be the best of the bunch. For me it was easily the poorest of the novels with a terrible spongey plot and some truely shocking writing, and yet managed to be twice as long as most of them. It needed some serious editing, and so will the film as a result.

  • Dec. 5, 2006, 2:32 p.m. CST


    by Ribbons

    I think Gambon is a testament to why it's important to read the books if you're involved with these movies. He gave a very good performance in 'Goblet of Fire,' but he just wasn't Dumbledore. As he refuses to read any of the books out of principle and possibly a little laziness (he thinks that an actor's performance should only be informed by the script), I can see how he would've made the decisions he did. But Dumbledore is not supposed to be as emotional as he was. In some ways I think it botches certain moments that happen later on in the series. That said, I like the fact that he's more sprightly than Harris. I can't imagine what a battle with Voldemort would've looked like were he still Dumbledore.

  • Dec. 5, 2006, 2:51 p.m. CST

    Humor in 'Goblet of Fire'

    by Ribbons

    Even though I have more problems with 'Goblet of Fire' than I do with probably any of the adaptations since 'Sorcerer's Stone,' I do have to give it credit for being the first genuinely (intentionally) funny installment of the series. Character interaction, outside of the immediate Ron/Harry/Hermione thing, was sort of neglected in the other three films, so it was nice to see that so much of the humor came from just being able to spend time with some of the auxiliary characters. Fred and George finally got a decent amount of time, for example, which I hope bodes well for the fifth film since they're due to factor in to the goings-on quite a bit. I also like that we spent more time than usual with Hagrid, Neville, and Ginny, especially since the last two become important later on in the series (as DocPazuzu has mentioned). Although curiously, we saw very little of Snape and Karkaroff, even though I found their subplot in "GoF" to be one of the most interesting.

  • Dec. 5, 2006, 3:31 p.m. CST


    by Frijole

    Actually I didn't find that out of character at all... and when re-reading the book found more than one passage that had others describing him as more emotional and "on edge" than they'd ever seen him before. I don't get a lot of the freaks on the IMDB Potter boards that really think Dumbledore should be forever docile (though I know that isn;t what you were implying). I think the eccentric,seemingly frail kooky character that suddenly whips out the asskickery was ruined by Yoda though...

  • Dec. 5, 2006, 7:09 p.m. CST


    by Ribbons

    Yeah, actually the future moment I was referring to was when Dumbledore cries at the end of 'OotP.' I have no problem with a perturbed Dumbledore, but slightly more poised would've been nice. I think the fact that Gambon already ran the gamut in terms of emotional expressions means that the moment won't seem as significant as it did in the book.

  • Dec. 6, 2006, 11:05 a.m. CST


    by J.B.M.A.

    Interesting that you had issues with Goblets adaptation. I found 'Prisoner' to be the problem movie for me. The film-makers mauled what should've been the easiest and scariest book to bring to the screen. I loathed it. Everyone else seems to love it...