July 14, 2009, 3:54 a.m. CST
July 14, 2009, 3:54 a.m. CST
July 14, 2009, 4:02 a.m. CST
July 14, 2009, 4:03 a.m. CST
Damn premature enter button.
July 14, 2009, 4:03 a.m. CST
Did his character feel 3-dimensional?
July 14, 2009, 4:08 a.m. CST
*SLIGHT SPOILER* The last book takes place mostly outside of Hogwarts.
July 14, 2009, 4:10 a.m. CST
This review is almost meaningless
July 14, 2009, 4:11 a.m. CST
I Loved the third as well, my favorite so far..but after your review of Transformers 2 harry, I don't think I can trust your opinions. You were so far off trandformers 2 that I just don't know anymore with you. I mean over 200 million in gross means that the majority loved it so it coul;d not have been that bad right? Does this mean that the 6th movie in the harry potter series is going to rock becasue you felt out of place with it? Don't know but I will find out tomorrow night won't I?
July 14, 2009, 4:12 a.m. CST
May be one of my favorite comedy things ever done. Pure genius.
Nice review H, i'm impressed that you watched all the other HP's last week. That's some marathon.<p> Talking in Capone's tb about the final film DEATHLY HALLOWS being split in two, which on the surface sounds good (more hp right?) but in practice might just mean they include that god-awful neverending 'camping out in the tent' sequence in it's entireity.
July 14, 2009, 4:39 a.m. CST
what the hell was that? how bout trying to REVIEW the movie harold... and i dont really know what people get out of these movies if they havent read the books. i dont get a sense of the characters or plot from watching those movies at all... read the books, they're a phenomenon for a reason
July 14, 2009, 4:41 a.m. CST
Transformers 2 is a total piece of shit. Making money is no indicator of quality, this is something you should really learn.
July 14, 2009, 4:44 a.m. CST
"I mean over 200 million in gross means that the majority loved it so it coul;d not have been that bad right?"... are u serious??? ur not seriously trying to say that because transformers made a lot of money then most people obviously liked it? ah no... it just means alot of people saw it, doesn't have any bearing on what they thought of it. most reviews have been terrible
July 14, 2009, 4:45 a.m. CST
This humongous ginger mountain, rolling through Texas in midsummer with the AC cooling his car down to subzero temperatures, being scared by a parking lot, christmas on his mind.<p> Only in America...
July 14, 2009, 5:11 a.m. CST
I wondered if the screenwriters couldnt juggle the jolly stuff after Cedric's death/Voldermort's return, so went too dark & miserable too soon
July 14, 2009, 5:16 a.m. CST
Renewed my faith. I've read all the books and managed to enjoy them, despite sometimes getting quite annoyed with Rowlings writing style. Never got that worked up for the films though, they always seemed kind of lifeless.
July 14, 2009, 5:20 a.m. CST
Sorry man but in what sense is this a good review? Harrington tells us a) he's unsatisfied at bits he thinks may be missing from a book he hasn't read, b) the film feels 'icky' and 'like an Autumn tale' and c) some rambling about how an "emphatic bond with Harry" is somehow a bad thing. Harry's reviews have never been great but for sheer lack of content this takes the fucking biscuit.
July 14, 2009, 5:21 a.m. CST
what's wrong with this world nowadays.
July 14, 2009, 5:23 a.m. CST
Sorry. Shouting at you is hardly the best way to go about it. But honestly Harry - this cannot be stressed enough - you are experiencing about 40-50% of the wonder and greatness of Harry Potter by only watching the films. That's not an exageration - the sheer amount of joyous fucking brilliance in the books is just lost on screen. It has to be. There is no way you could squeeze ANY of the books into 2 - 2 and half hours. READ THE BOOKS. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD STOP BEING STUBBORN AND READ THEM. Sorry. Shouting again.
bruce, as someone who's read the books I thought it was a good review because it didn't cover the story (which most of us know).<p> I think old H gets a lot of stick for his review writing but he does have the knack of getting to the essence of a film. He may fumble and bumble around somewhat on his way there, but he does often manage to highlight the heart of what makes a particular film succeed.
July 14, 2009, 5:45 a.m. CST
was spot on. there is a new frachise in town. Twilight. Those kids who grew up with harry potter. are now teens and have abondoned harry potter franchise in droves.
July 14, 2009, 5:46 a.m. CST
by Kentucky Colonel
Misty morning, clouds in the sky<p> Without warning, the wizard walks by<p> Casting his shadow, weaving his spell<p> Funny clothes, tinkling bell<p> <p> Never talking<p> Just keeps walking<p> Spreading his magic<p> <p> Evil power disappears<p> Demons worry when the wizard is near<p> He turns tears into joy<p> Everyones happy when the wizard walks by<p> <p> Never talking<p> Just keeps walking<p> Spreading his magic<p> <p> Sun is shining, clouds have gone by<p> All the people give a happy sigh<p> He has passed by, giving his sign<p> Left all the people feeling so fine<p> <p> Never talking<p> Just keeps walking<p> Spreading his magic<p>
July 14, 2009, 5:50 a.m. CST
by Kentucky Colonel
Our love grows stronger now with every hour<p> Look into my eyes and you'll see who I am<p> My name is Lucifer, please take my hand!<P> Fuckin' Sabbath RULES, Bitches!!!!
July 14, 2009, 5:58 a.m. CST
and by the end of it all, one thing was clear. these books did not harm jk bank balance. She became an immensly wealthy woman. But as the books went on it became clear that she needed an editor. JK rowling told the publisher to keep thier oar out. Steve kloves had his orders to slim the books down. This meant keeping things out of the film. Fans moaned about this. But there is a thing called screening time. The reviewer on Sky news said that the franchises main problem apart from the kids acting was the weak material. and the reviewer ominously pointed out that these child actors really have nowhere to go once its over.
July 14, 2009, 6:01 a.m. CST
It is a sad thing indeed that you haven't read the books, because they are a work of art. Whereas the movies are a work of commerce, except The prisoner of Azkaban where the director actually cared about making a respectable movie. Anyway, i'm glad the film touched you so deeply and i hope it lives up to your emotional review.
July 14, 2009, 6:02 a.m. CST
by Atticus Finch
Anyone who thinks the Twilight series has overcome HP is sorely mistaken. I mean, Twilight didn't even crack $200 million domestically. The lowest HP did $250. The only reason the Twilight series does anything, books or films, is because there is nothing else out right now. If HP and Twilight had come out at the same time, Twilight would have been buried. Ha.
July 14, 2009, 6:07 a.m. CST
by Righteous Brother
and less of the boy wizard stuff?
July 14, 2009, 6:19 a.m. CST
You must be deluding yourself if you think everyone has "abondoned harry potter franchise in droves", emeraldboy.<p>Watch and learn my little leprechaun.
July 14, 2009, 6:23 a.m. CST
...is that there aren't enough Nifflers in them. Fact.
July 14, 2009, 6:25 a.m. CST
I don't get how people can even begin to review let alone understand the Harry Potter movies without reading the books and knowing all the major shit that is always left out of them.
July 14, 2009, 6:35 a.m. CST
so they can get the most from a movie, are the equivalent of the brain-lazy fucks who wait for the English language remakes of foreign movies. It’s not a creative choice, it’s bone idleness. <p> I also have no respect for people who read scripts of movies they are looking forward to or actively seek out spoilers beforehand. They are the obsessive "collector mentality" who need to be first and devour scraps even if it makes the final work a lessened experience, the double bagged comic action figure fucktards who don’t approach film as art and have no patience and little depth of appreciation.
July 14, 2009, 6:51 a.m. CST
...its going to kick so much ass for you, you have no possible idea. You will cast your imagination with these actors and see them perform scenes bigger, better, and more intricate than you ever have before. Then you will retrospectively look back at the films and be pissed right the fuck off.
July 14, 2009, 6:52 a.m. CST
But did you actually WATCH it??? ... After Wolverine I have to make sure.
July 14, 2009, 6:53 a.m. CST
After hearing what's been left out this time I'm kinda pissed.
July 14, 2009, 7 a.m. CST
by Six Demon Bag
cause i didnt see it in those words at all??? what the hell, dude.
July 14, 2009, 7:01 a.m. CST
by Six Demon Bag
July 14, 2009, 7:06 a.m. CST
But really, it's too late now. These books, at the center of it all, are mystery books--all, except the final chapter. Despite the continuation portions that each book holds, each book is focused on the "whodunnit" which has a great parlor scene at the end that explains it all (they've tried to do these in the movies, and it's been falling short so far). BUT--you already know "whodunit" which will probably make the experience of progressing through the books less engaging. These books have always, to me, felt very much like the Hardy Boys/Nancy Drew books (yep grew up reading those), 3 young characters figuring out a mystery, with the added bonus of the actual storyline that has been seeded that leads to that damn good ending (haters be damned--still have goosebumps when **** jumps into the fray with **** in hand at the final battle).
July 14, 2009, 7:14 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
Apart from bits (especially in the last book), the writing is SO damn unimaginative. Rowling is NOT a stylist, but the likes of Cuaron are. (And, surprisingly, Yates, it seems.) Rowling's writing is dull and plodding in the way that Chris Columbus' direction is dull and plodding - which is possibly why the mega fans of the books will love those two films most. BUT BUT BUT - what Rowling does, have, in spades, is that ALL IMPORTANT thing - she ADORES her characters. And that love for Harry, Ron and Hermione is so tangible, it's really quite magnificent and moving, and no amount of bad writing can obscure this deep love. THAT, in my opinion, is what makes this series so special, and that quality has been AMPLY reflected in the films. The Gnomes will always complain about horcruxes or spells, but in truth they were never Rowling's strong suits.
July 14, 2009, 7:17 a.m. CST
It's scattered, in need of substantial editing and focuses too much on Harry's personal history and melancholy and has very little substance in it about the film. Harry - take a half hour and rewrite the review...make it about the movie; not just about you bud.
July 14, 2009, 7:19 a.m. CST
It was more of an art house film then a Harry Potter movie. It looked pretty, but there was no substance and from what I heard butchered the book. I almost feel asleep and found myself pretty bored by the acting as well. I like the second one and the fifth one. The second one ended up being a buddy film with Heromine out of the way and its up to Harry and Ron. The fifth one had a good amount of story and action with a darker feel. The first one is good for what it is and the fourth one was too long at times.
July 14, 2009, 7:19 a.m. CST
The first two aren't fantastic (they're written for a very young age), but after that it gets hugely entertaining... and yes, better than the movies (with the possible exception of book 5 -- very boring opening to that book). I honestly feel sorry for the folks who are following the series through the films: They're SO uneven and only tell part of the story... and the books are so enjoyable.
July 14, 2009, 7:23 a.m. CST
1. Harry is at home. 2. Harry goes to hogwarts. 3. Something stops him or slows him down from getting to hogwarts. 4. Arrive at hogwarts and something mysterious is going on. 5. Said mystery involves Voldermort. 6. Harry confronts said evil and has someone conveniently save him. And one again Harry sacrifices nothing, learns nothing, and has everything done for him. Yawn.
July 14, 2009, 7:23 a.m. CST
July 14, 2009, 7:24 a.m. CST
July 14, 2009, 7:26 a.m. CST
Ceiling fucking cat Knowles why don't you just try, for once, reviewing a fucking movie without trying to tie it into your sloth like existence. We don't give a fuck how Half-Blood relates to the limited experiences of your emotionally stunted life in between the servings of Twinkies. Fuck sakes man, how can anyone run a site like this for 13 years and not improve as a writer?
July 14, 2009, 7:26 a.m. CST
I remember people praised and hailed it when it came out. Damn you Alfonso Cuaron!
July 14, 2009, 7:29 a.m. CST
I seem to remember a test screening review of a much earlier version of this film getting its ass kicked because it focused too much on love/romance rather than actual plot. I am glad that most of that crap is gone. People read the books for the full story, and go to the movies to see the kickass magic get fleshed out on-screen. I'm all for this cut of the film, if Harry's review is anything to go by.
July 14, 2009, 7:30 a.m. CST
by Kauzi Sezso
It takes the arguably-worst book and makes the story into a cracking, suspenseful film. I love the look and feel of the 3rd film, but the script cuts too much out of the story -- essential stuff, really. That said, I don't think they could've taken on the darker tone of the more recent films if the 3rd one hadn't looked as it did.
July 14, 2009, 7:37 a.m. CST
by Atticus Finch
Quite an ironic user handle.
July 14, 2009, 7:39 a.m. CST
by Turd Furgeson
Asyou describe them. Kind of sad, and all over the place. I love where this movie left your brain. Sounds like this movie inspired some real emotion from you.
July 14, 2009, 7:39 a.m. CST
by Cap'n Jack
How about you tell us how the movie was...
July 14, 2009, 7:45 a.m. CST
noen of harry potres movies are in ,my top ten of summer moveis wich you can can see at aint it bale news . com .i reely think harry potter is for babys .wehn you see my toop ten sumer movies you have to to look at the coments to see the proper topten becase i change my mind after i do it and relize indredible hulk is beter tahn inron man .here is it at ainr it bale mews . com ........... http://tinyurl.com/lse4qc i hope you liek it and taht it make yyou think aboat your favoirte summer movies . http://tinyurl.com/lse4qc .and i will make new revew wehn i see new moive . thank yuo everone !
July 14, 2009, 7:45 a.m. CST
with a passion. unfocused, lazy cobbled together as if JK was under and she probably was under huge pressure to finish the series of by WB and her publishers. I could understand that HP couldnt go back to Hogwarts. and was on the run but JK only dedicated one chapter to hogwarts. near the end. Her attempt at a then current hot topic of torture, was all over the place. I am referring to the scene where Hermoine gets kidnapped and tortured by Bellatrix Le strange. It will be intresting to see if that passage gets excised from the two part movie.
July 14, 2009, 7:48 a.m. CST
by just pillow talk
I'm not sure how you could say it has no substance. And how was the acting "boring" compared to any of the other films? <p>I still feel this should have been a seven year TV series and not movies, which have shortchanged certain characters due to time constraints (Snape in particular).
July 14, 2009, 7:59 a.m. CST
by ORGANIZED CHAOS
Really looking forward to this one, but anybody else agree that Radcliffe is kinda unnerving in the role? He's not particularly terrible but he just looks so bored all the time and everytime he talks it just feels so fake and forced for some reason. He also has those bizzare dead eyes. And the weirdest thing is he's very excited and enthusiastic in interviews, you'd think he'd be able to convey a bit of that enthusiasm in the movies.
July 14, 2009, 8:02 a.m. CST
is that when they turned on the hype machine for film three. They said it was the darkest of all the books and going forward. they kept using that word. What I loved about book six was her passages about those caves where Dumbledore took harry in the boat and lakes which were filled with the souls of the dead. That was best writing in the series as a whole. really black and dark stuff, beautifully written. from the trailers i can see that the metophor is something to do with an assault on the city of london. I loved JK rowlings use of word in say diagon ally for the names of the sweets. and her use of names. BUt Jk rowling suffered from paddingitis. from book 4 onwards. Books 5.6,7 were full of filing. which were unnessecary. as were constant use of capital letters to when any character got anry epsecially harry and mrs weasley, who became the series most annoying character along with ron.
July 14, 2009, 8:03 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
really, hagrid comes in, thy all go up to him and hug him, then the headmaster says 'no exams this year!' and the HORRIBLE john williams music starts playing... it's puke-making, sickly sweet rubbish. i remember leaving the cinema with my girlfriend at the time - we'd been conned into seeing the film by all those 'it's darker! it's better! reviews - and darn it we were PISSED OFF! Thank god for Cuaron, who introduced a bit of style into the proceedings.
July 14, 2009, 8:04 a.m. CST
July 14, 2009, 8:05 a.m. CST
July 14, 2009, 8:10 a.m. CST
It was ok, not as cool as cube. When we going to see something on Splice damnit?
July 14, 2009, 8:11 a.m. CST
I had the same approach because I was enjoying the movies so much but couldn't wait any more after the last one so read Prince and Hallows. Just do it - I'm still not looking forward to any other movie in the near future as much as this one.
July 14, 2009, 8:12 a.m. CST
I won't start to read the books until these shitty movies are a faint memory. I want to go in "clean". And I do really want to read them.
July 14, 2009, 8:23 a.m. CST
Got about 50 pages into the first one when I realized that I wasn't dumb enough to enjoy it.
July 14, 2009, 8:33 a.m. CST
No Way! You're definitely dumb enough. You didn't finish it because you couldn't!
July 14, 2009, 8:35 a.m. CST
You got 50 pages in and bailed because most picture books are 32 pages. You were 18 pages past your limit. You unintelligent ignorant fuck face.
July 14, 2009, 8:40 a.m. CST
I'd be surprised if you could even count to 50. Oh and you got some ginger pubes in your teeth.
July 14, 2009, 8:47 a.m. CST
If you hadn't known about the big death coming do you think it would have sinificantly changed how you saw this film? I had mixed feelings about the last three films. I was happy with them personally but I couldn't keep from wondering how the non-readers in my life interrupted them. Did the magic come through for them or were they just confused?
July 14, 2009, 8:48 a.m. CST
Great come back. you're not even worth chasing from Tb to Tb. Take care little boy.
July 14, 2009, 8:49 a.m. CST
I'm one of those people who'll save them for after the movies. Let's be honest though. I have the impression these books are written for people who normally don't read books. They feel real proud about having read them and then bitch about every single little thing they change in the movies. Or maybe I'm wrong. Anyway, they're in my 'to read' list but not on the top.
July 14, 2009, 8:49 a.m. CST
Little boy? You probably wish. I am WAAAAYYY too fat to be called little.
July 14, 2009, 8:51 a.m. CST
July 14, 2009, 8:57 a.m. CST
Are untainted by his reading of the books. Harry my man. You may like even love the movies but you are going to so fucked off about what's had to ditched to make the films sub 3 hours once you read the books.
July 14, 2009, 9 a.m. CST
I picked up the books after the Order of the Phoenix movie is that plot discussions of the subsequent books were becoming so omnipresent in all media that I didn't want to get spoilers that way. I'd rather read my way to the conclusion and then see the movies then have both spoiled for me by some lazy media type. Also Morgan even though the books have some mature coloring in the margins the series began with a clear target audience. That so many adults also enjoy them is a testament to engaging the stories are imo. I'd not judge the books so harshly simply because they get people that don't read often to read a little.
July 14, 2009, 9:01 a.m. CST
Books are really good. Me and the other trillion readers can attest to that. Films are good, especially from 3 onwards. You'll always have the naysayers, but my little 6 year old nephew can tell you what happens to whom, in which book. Now that is a testament to good storytelling. JK Rowling is a great writer.
July 14, 2009, 9:03 a.m. CST
by Six Demon Bag
you write a review harry about the film but it doesnt say anything about the movie. nice one.
July 14, 2009, 9:03 a.m. CST
by Six Demon Bag
it didnt actually sound anything like this song
July 14, 2009, 9:05 a.m. CST
Is it Orcus or was that actually a SHORT review by Harry?
July 14, 2009, 9:13 a.m. CST
WHERE ARE THE PUBLIC ENEMIES REVIEWS..enjoy NYC. Peace
July 14, 2009, 9:17 a.m. CST
That's some nice imagery that fits, Harry. I always thought he was tortured because I knew the backstory in the books of him & his mom being threatened by Voldemort and set up for failure but that's where his motivation kinda ended for me. Never really thought of him as a "bomb in his ribcage" kinda guy but you are absolutly right. As if he wasn't twitchy and anxious enough...
July 14, 2009, 9:28 a.m. CST
I'm looking forward to seeing it. Third movie on has been great. The first two movies were god awful. All plastic and no soul. Like watching one of those straight to video Disney sequels. The last movie I liked, but I can see how a lot of folks who haven't read the books wouldn't care for it. It is a bit duller than the others. To wonder how huge this franchise would be if Rowling and Columbus hadn't been in charge of the first two. Cuaron had to not only make a great movie, but he had to drag the existing franchise out of the crapper.
July 14, 2009, 9:38 a.m. CST
given all the heavy lifting he was tasked with. People were absolutely poised to be offended at the slightest deviation from the book in anticipation of the first movie. I hardly blame him for coming off a bit slavish. I also think that some crucial and underappreciated groundwork was established with the casting and production design in his installments. He also took great care to give ample time to everything that happens in those movies that would resonate later - no doubt with Rowling's input. I rewatched 1-5 like Harry over the last several days in anticipation of Prince and I come away thinking this is one of the best things of its kind ever. A certain segment of genre fans flatly underappreciate how well this whole thing has been realized.
July 14, 2009, 9:51 a.m. CST
by Star Hump
Halloween rock for submentals
July 14, 2009, 9:56 a.m. CST
Well I’ll read them then. After that I can engage in a stimulating literature debate with your 6-year old cousin.
July 14, 2009, 10 a.m. CST
by axel fff
On second thought, I'm glad I didn't have to sit through Harry's Public Enemies review.
July 14, 2009, 10:35 a.m. CST
by Atticus Finch
You are so obviously a jealous Twilight knob that it's not even funny. You just wish Twilight was half of what the Potter saga is so you try to rip Rowling and the series. Sorry, but you can have your fat Mormon author and her gay series. It can't come close tot he cultural phenomena that Potter created.
July 14, 2009, 10:57 a.m. CST
Good question: Is the new harry potter a good movie or not? I read Harrys review and i dont now but i have this strange feeling that he doesn´t like the film. Only in the nearly last sentence he really tell us he liked the movie a lot. Strange, is it?
July 14, 2009, 11:01 a.m. CST
So glad to know the details of your muscial taste...I know that better then what you thought of the movie..DOES NOT ONE of you pick up the books and read them??? How can you speak of a story line if you don't know the books? And Don't say "it shouldn't matter" cause it does, there are 7 of them and they have been out for what, 10 years? No excuses..the movie might have been more enjoyable..that was the tone of book 6-this is not a happy book, Harry's life has sucked in every book up to this point and book 6 slammed it home
July 14, 2009, 11:02 a.m. CST
Say what you will about this review, but Harry expresses the same feelings I had after finishing the book.<p>There was such a suffocating feeling of inexorable doom in the story that it actually got a little annoying in parts--like Rowling had to struggle mightily to stretch what amounted to a fairly simple trap across an entire school year. I found myself mentally shouting at Harry in places for not seeing what was up.<p>Of course, after reading the last book, it made more sense, but it was a frustrating story at the time.<p>On another note, regarding the quote from the Sky reviewer mentioned above: "these child actors really have nowhere to go once its over". Well, how about here: to being set for life financially while still having your entire adult life ahead of you to pursue any dream or field of study you like. Sounds like a pretty damn good place to me! A bunch of well-adjusted, mature young actors who can keep acting or do something else entirely.
July 14, 2009, 11:08 a.m. CST
by Six Demon Bag
Positive: 2<P> Negative: 1<P> Harry's WTF BLABFEST: 1.
July 14, 2009, 11:10 a.m. CST
I love these books, but he's right about this in my opinion. At least with books 5 and 6. I thought that both of those stories went in circles for really long stretches in the middle of the school year--great setups, great wrap-ups, but really struggling to fit the one-school-year-per-story mold. Those repetitive stretches made all the protagonists seem dumber for not being better able to suss out things that were going on under their noses.<p>The last book was quite a chunk of paper too, but it was such a brilliant send-off and much more densely packed with action and drama--a real roller-coaster ride.
July 14, 2009, 11:10 a.m. CST
by Six Demon Bag
but when i you gonna write about it????
July 14, 2009, 11:11 a.m. CST
I can't see how ANY fan of the books can enjoy the 3rd movie. It was a horrible adaptation. And for people like Harry....I still don't understand how it's your favorite. The movie made no sense, it didn't even bother to give you a reason for Sirius breaking out when he did.
July 14, 2009, 11:19 a.m. CST
It's unfocused, hard to read, and very dull. I'd cut everything, except the second last sentence - the one sentence that makes any sense.
July 14, 2009, 11:20 a.m. CST
Harry in a car in Texas in late July with no AC? Wow, that must have smelled good.
July 14, 2009, 11:52 a.m. CST
I must have missed it somehwere in the what I was listening to on the radio and empty parking lot or was it the, "Can you feel the movies coming to an end?" part of the rambling? That wasn't a review - that was the first 10 minutes of Harry's therapy session. At least I didn't see a, "That being said." Then again, I think I'm becoming numb to hary's most over used transition.
July 14, 2009, 12:14 p.m. CST
Trust me Harry, in the books she's a prop character, a paginated courtesan, a thin-as-paper lover perfectly matched to Rowling's cardboard hero. No worries as to accuracy, because nobody cares. Man, this movies sounds worse and worse the more I read or hear of it. Sounds like a potboiler. Well, it had to happen sooner or later - not every director can wring real magic from Rowling's flaccid prose. Guess I'll set my hopes on Princess and the Frog, and hope that Disney has finally gotten its Disney back...
July 14, 2009, 12:15 p.m. CST
That's all I need to know.
July 14, 2009, 12:16 p.m. CST
He, and Lucas' Industrial Light and Magic, are the reasons I'll still go to see this.
July 14, 2009, 12:25 p.m. CST
I'm speaking as someone who has never read a full HP book but has enjoyed the movies. This one is so dull and talky and filled with bad acting and annoying characters that I couldn't believe what I was watching. It's full of cutesy high school bullshit and the big ending is hardly a surprise. There's also lots of issues with pacing and weird pauses in the dialogue.
July 14, 2009, 12:31 p.m. CST
and harry?!?! they shouldve devoloped her more before they ran off and SPOILER OMFG got married
July 14, 2009, 12:49 p.m. CST
I like the Harry Potter series, I really do, it goes down easy, it's fun, but let's be honest. JK Rowling has never had a single original idea in her head. "Grab my robe" is "touch the hem of my robe" from Dickens' A CHRISTMAS CAROL. She 'borrows' mearly all of her ideas from the entire pre-existing fantasy genre, like Tolkien (the killer tree, The Whumping Tree or something, is a form of an Ent/mean Wizard of Oz trees, The Dementors are the Ghost of Christmas Future/Ringwraiths). The whole "chosen one" plotline that was old even before STAR WARS. I could go on and on. Everything she does has been done and re-done. Rowling is like Tarantino, she copped all the cool parts from older, better, more sophisticated works and mixed it all together and hooked the younger audience with the first book because they hadn't been exposed to the other literary works of fantasy yet. She made herself the richest woman in England and has never had a single original idea, clever and endearing, but nothing original. She's all just clever pastiche spun for Generation Y who didn't know any better and just got caught up in it as it captured the popular consciousness. Everything old is new again, I suppose. I'm still going to see the movie but let's be real, these books do not belong in the same class as Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Lewis Carrol, Dickens, Baum, etc. Rowling's Harry Potter is McDonald's to their filet mignon.
July 14, 2009, 12:58 p.m. CST
Another completely insipid review. Why do we even bother with this has-been anymore?
July 14, 2009, 1 p.m. CST
Why don't you just review the film, Harry?
July 14, 2009, 1:07 p.m. CST
Well-written and thought out, sirrah. You display far more acumen than the idiot LA Times columnist who said (hold on to your nuts) that Rowling is a better writer than C.S. Lewis. Good GOD no wonder that paper's nearly extinct. Those who read badly, write badly.
July 14, 2009, 1:08 p.m. CST
This movie should leave you feeling like you did at the end of The Empire Strikes Back when you saw it for the first time as a kid. That's what the book was. It was the dark chapter. It was the book that made everything seem hopeless, but then left a glimmer of possibility at the end. To me, your review makes me think they did it right.
July 14, 2009, 1:17 p.m. CST
And you too, David Heyman. For fucking up all the great potential this film had.
July 14, 2009, 1:18 p.m. CST
always feel like a lot is cut out and side plots are just kinda thrown in and then forgotten. decent flicks though.
July 14, 2009, 1:21 p.m. CST
apparently you felt bad, and some stuff happened, and then the movie ended. insightful.
July 14, 2009, 1:26 p.m. CST
Normally I think the criticism leveled at Harry's writing style is a bit OTT, but I genuinely struggled to find meaning and point in this review... I'm guessing he liked it?
July 14, 2009, 1:33 p.m. CST
Too much focus on the "love" and not enough focus on the plot and setup and mystery.
July 14, 2009, 1:34 p.m. CST
I think your mom is looking for you.
July 14, 2009, 1:40 p.m. CST
It's pretty souless and empty review, not your usual colorful and in depth review. And it Ginny not Jenny! I have read this book and thought this would be the best movie, so far. I will find out on Friday. Laters.
July 14, 2009, 1:44 p.m. CST
I wasn't to impressed with the 4th movie, felt there was alot missing and bit rushed, so was worried about David Yates directing. Why couldn't they get the director from the 3rd movie, or even guillermo del toro, if he wasn't to busy.
July 14, 2009, 1:45 p.m. CST
And they all fall back on the same standard: The kids are great! They're growing up! <p> Blah blah blah. But they all seem to have the same problems: important events are treated like small talk with no setup, the end feels empty and out of place, its disappointing, etc. <p> But the romance and love story was good! <p> Barf.
July 14, 2009, 1:45 p.m. CST
July 14, 2009, 1:47 p.m. CST
As a critic of your stature, and of a series of films of such yielded expectation you really should consider some familiarity with source material (perhaps even read it?) before broadcasting your review. Please refrain yourself further embarassment on both future releases, due 2010.
July 14, 2009, 1:49 p.m. CST
I hate to pile on, but it's getting worse. Harry's review is all over the place, there are sentences that make no sense, he gets character names wrong...I could have a stroke and write a more comprehensive review than this.
July 14, 2009, 1:49 p.m. CST
Does anyone get this critical of other reviewers when they claim to not read the source material? It shouldn't be required to review a film.
July 14, 2009, 1:55 p.m. CST
getting a key character's name would be a start after watching any movie, no?
July 14, 2009, 1:56 p.m. CST
But only if he bothered to read the end credits. I think that was pretty lazy of him to call her "Jenny", but I won't fault him for not reading the books.
July 14, 2009, 2:04 p.m. CST
by Franco Begbie
That's pretty much how I felt after the penultimate book, so they're obviously doing a decent job of the film series. <p> <p> It's all setting up a really beautiful finish to the story. Hope they get the last two movies right.
July 14, 2009, 2:19 p.m. CST
make sure you know the subject, hence he should have read the books or skimmed through them...there really isn't any action in HBP-it's all about the snogging, the real good stuff happens the last 100 pages
July 14, 2009, 2:21 p.m. CST
And at 600+ pages, you can keep the books.
July 14, 2009, 2:40 p.m. CST
You are not supposed to know the books to know how to review the movie, therefore demanding Harry to read the books before seeing the movies is just a prime example of foolishness. <p> He should have some knowledge of the series, but only because this is the 6th installment. He should not, however, have to know what's going to happen in the film before he sets out to see it.
July 14, 2009, 2:41 p.m. CST
And yet, they cut out a lot of the good stuff! Why? For more snogging and a ridiculous Attack on the Burrow sequence. RE-TARD-ED.
July 14, 2009, 2:47 p.m. CST
Ahhhhhh yes, the heady days of yore.... The days of romance for that perfect cheese burger..... It was 16 days old.... Leave it alone, they said....
July 14, 2009, 2:56 p.m. CST
are popular with "adults" should make everyone fear for their futures. The popularity of these half-baked shit movies just reinforces that sentiment.
July 14, 2009, 3 p.m. CST
by Bob Loblaw Law Blog
and I really enjoyed it. **SPOILERS BELOW**<p><p><p> The ending left me a bit unsatisfied only because when I read the book that scene seemed more more action packed. Plus, I liked in the book that Harry was truly helpless. Perhaps screenwriter Steve Kloves decided that the audience needed to see Harry trusting Snape at a crucial moment, rather than watch the scene immobilized, as in the book. I feel like Snape's actions in the final book are kind of obvious now at the end of this film, way more than in the novel (I remember debating with friends for months after reading the book whether we though Snape was ultimately good or bad...)<p>Still, there's a lot to love... Jim Broadbent is fantastic as Horace Slughorn, and the moments with him and the Slug Club bring out some of the funniest moments of the entire series. Evanna Lynch once again proves that she IS Luna Lovegood... and the addition of Jennifer Smith as Lavender Brown was great. I loved seeing Ron get some action in the book.<p>The penultimate major act with Harry and Dumbledore in the cave was quite good. My wife -- also an avid fan of the books -- leapt out of her seat when the demons (or whatever the hell those things in the water are) grabbed Harry... even though she KNEW it was coming.<p>And, Kudos to David Yates for really bringing Hermione's pain to life during the scene where she's crying over Ron and Lavender's relationship. Having seen these actors grow up as these characters for the past 8 years, I feel a real connection to them. Even though I know Ron and Hermione end up together in the end, I felt bad for her!<p>So, for me, this film really worked. It's not perfect, but hell, few films are. I really applaud Yates, Kloves and Co. for their efforts.
July 14, 2009, 3:01 p.m. CST
You feel the same way about adults that like Lord of the Rings or Star Wars?
July 14, 2009, 3:03 p.m. CST
The movie, not the book. (I tried reading some J.K. Rowling, found it a horrifically derivative soup of assorted myths, legends, and other people's fictional literature. Not creative at all. Ursula K. LeGuin made the best appraisal that I've read of the Harry Potter books, something like "Harry Potter's world is special only because the author says it is.") The third movie was a blast -- style, pacing, acting (Gary Oldman FTW), and even John Williams got some of his 70s/80s groove back in some of the musical cues. The scene in which Harry saves himself from the dementors is still the single best moment in the cinematic versions of the books. I did and still do find that profoundly moving, really the only genuinely moving moment in all of the films (Cuaron fortunately managed to stay off Radclilffe long enough to keep the actor's wooden style from fouling up the moment). Order of the Phoenix had a pretty good fight scene at the end, too. Apart from that scene and PoA, everything else about the movies is forgettable.
July 14, 2009, 3:08 p.m. CST
by Bass Ackwards
But I feel like everywhere talks about that being the best of the series cause they feel like that's the one that's "respectable" to like, given the pedigree of the director. I think PoA was the film that elevated the series, but I also think it dealt with the character and story very shallowly, masking those faults mostly by leaning on the novelty of it's non-linear aspect. I like it, I think the films following it took it's lead and are pretty great themselves too. Mostly I just get tired of hearing how it's the only film worth watching, that feels like lazy talkbaking more than genuine opinion. But that's just me.
July 14, 2009, 4:13 p.m. CST
What do you MEAN the guy clearly painted to be the bad guy is the bad guy? Let me guess--the new teacher this year is somehow involved with the strange happenings! They would've gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling wizards.
July 14, 2009, 4:13 p.m. CST
What do you MEAN the guy clearly painted to be the bad guy is the bad guy? Let me guess--the new teacher this year is somehow involved with the strange happenings! They would've gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling wizards.
July 14, 2009, 4:41 p.m. CST
meyer. and anyway there is a plagariusm suit going on. Apparently a friend of hers whom she met in brigham young university 2 decades claims that meyer stole story from her. Twilight is a load of shite. I have not seen the movie. Saw the trailers. load of shite. as is new moon.
July 14, 2009, 5:54 p.m. CST
As a fan of the books I don't understand it when people say Prisoner of Azkaban is the best movie. The backstory they left out (particularly on James and co.) completely changes the way characters past and present are viewed). Favourite movie so far is OotP but then thats the worst book in my mind so it wasn't hard to surpass.
July 14, 2009, 5:55 p.m. CST
I literally stopped reading and said 'what the fuck?'.
July 14, 2009, 6:58 p.m. CST
...up the movie. Seriously you would have to have been living under a fucking rock, or not care about HP (in this case you won't even be seeing the movie, right ;) ) not to know the outcome of Half-Blood Prince and Deathly Hallows. THAT'S why they had to shake up plot points, cut some of the 'mystery' parts and change the way the lightning-struck tower scene was handled because they can't bullshit the audience anymore trying to make us believe that Snape just killed Dumbledore evilly and there's nothing more to it. I wish people would STOP whining about elements from the books being cut. Basic retreads of the books would be so pointless. The invented scenes are really good because it gives everyone more Harry Potter that didn't exist before. If you want the books read them; boycott the fucking films if it bothers you so much. Prisoner of Azkaban is the best film because Cuaron dared to make an actual movie and not just an edition of a franchise, which is what EVERY OTHER one has felt like, including Half-Blood Prince I'm betting. IMO you could take the Prisoner of Azkaban movie and it could stand alone perfectly. You can't do that with any of the other entries.
July 14, 2009, 7:11 p.m. CST
by Thunderbolt Ross
... couldn't continue. It was poorly written and dull.
July 14, 2009, 7:32 p.m. CST
God, Harry, after almost a decade of reading your site it is very clear that you NEVER read books (comic books don't count). Your writing skills would improve immensely if you cracked a grown-up book once in a while. How did you ever make it through high school? After each Potter movie you ALWAYS note that you have not read the books. Why not? Do you spend every second of every day watching movies? Read the books, there will still be plenty of time to watch movies multiple times.
July 14, 2009, 8:10 p.m. CST
The movies were screwed up and left a lot of plot points out........ and why the fuck did they have to burn the Weasley's house? nothing in the books. READ !! 'nuff said
July 14, 2009, 8:15 p.m. CST
and nearly the whole series is classic. to each his own.
July 14, 2009, 8:17 p.m. CST
I can't think of a single movie that "changed things up" simply because people had read the books and knew the ending. <p> No, they changed things up and cut out the action because they're not creative enough to figure out a way to include it.
July 14, 2009, 8:53 p.m. CST
did you even add that bs about your trip to the theatre. That has to be possibly one of the most unneccesary paragraphs in any review.... ever. Aside from tht, I like how you acted like you didn't like the movie in the first paragraph, only to praise it the rest of the review. You did touch on one thing I'm most interested in, and that was how Malfoys role was played. I'm excited for that, and excited for this movie. OK review.
July 14, 2009, 8:55 p.m. CST
oh and I know someone said this already, but I'll emphasize this again, because sometimes it seems like you don't give a shit about researching things like this, and you just write what you want, but.... THE GIRLS NAME IS SPELLED GINNY /HPnerd. You really gonna wait til 2012 to read all the books??? lol
July 14, 2009, 9:35 p.m. CST
people haven't read the books is that they don't know what's going on because the movie is missing all kinds of shit. You guys really need to just read the books. I think in the end if you stick with just the movies, you're going to feel like the movies ruined the books for you when you eventually do read them. The books are that much better. I haven't liked a Potter movie since PoA.
July 14, 2009, 10:04 p.m. CST
I don't either. The films have good acting, visuals, but they are so damn boring. I don't need to see two hours of people flying around on brooms.
July 14, 2009, 10:54 p.m. CST
by Bob Loblaw Law Blog
I don't know... I've read all the books and seen all the films now. I've enjoyed all of them. I didn't feel that the movies ruined the book for me at all. They're different, but I expected that. For me, the movies are just different interpretations of the source material. I can live with that without having my whole world shattered<p>To each their own.
July 14, 2009, 10:57 p.m. CST
by Bob Loblaw Law Blog
Seems that I kind of misread what you said. But, I don't really feel that those who see the films first and THEN read the books are going to feel that the movies "ruined the books" for them. I didn't read the first book until AFTER I saw the movie, and I enjoyed it just fine (I did read the rest of the books before watching their subsequent film adaptations, though).
July 15, 2009, 12:22 a.m. CST
and I still don't fucking have a clue if Harry thought this was any good or not. I do however get the feeling a serious case of midlife crisis is around the corner. If there is a more melancholy fucker on this planet I don't wanna know about it.
July 15, 2009, 12:37 a.m. CST
The first two were, yes, too frightened to stray from the books, so both end up with pacing problems. But the ravaging the critics gave Chris Columbus was unnecessary -- he set up the world beautifully and filmed some really terrific scenes. (The climax of Chamber of Secret: a really fun, pure fantasy sequence.)<br /><br />For Prisoner of Azkaban, Cuaron tried to push the kids' acting abilities (something that didn't pan out in that film but I think helped down the road), but the film feels too brief and too dark, and doesn't explain some things that seriously need to be explained. ("Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot, and Prongs" are mentioned more than once but never explained in the slightest, leaving all non-readers hopelessly confused.)<br /><br /> Adapting these has proven to be a funny thing. It's necessary to shed sideplots and short-change supporting characters, but at the same time, the more they focus on the core characters, the more the movies lose their flavor. That was my biggest issue with the 3rd and 5th movies. I think Mike Newell struck the best balance with Goblet of Fire; I was a little disappointed he only wanted to do one.
July 15, 2009, 12:39 a.m. CST
by Horace Cox
If you re-read the first two books and then go back and watch the movie versions, I think you will find that they are pretty much spot on in terms of the tone and story. Those two are much more of a "kids' story" than the rest. The tone and story of the books - and correspondingly the films - shift dramatically from PoA onward.<p> I think if you go back and watch those movies fresh off reading the books you may have a new appreciation for Chris Columbus' efforts.
July 15, 2009, 1:31 a.m. CST
...and there was a quote from one of those Chud jizz mopers during the commercial. Of course it was a sloppy blow job of a quote, but WTF are amateurs like this getting quotes on any A class movie. I'm looking out the window for the four horsemen of the apocalypse. Burn Hollywood Burn!
July 15, 2009, 2:32 a.m. CST
all I'm asking for is spirit of the books to be there on screen. I don't need every subplot and character moment. PoA works the best as a film because of the way the book was written. The plot was simple enough to adapt, Its core elements are all there elements. As was The Half Blood Prince which is why they made the best movies, you didn't feel you were missing anything essential. I can't say that about the other entries in the franchise.
July 15, 2009, 2:49 a.m. CST
At midnight. My walk home was more exciting than Harry's review. The books are so easy to get through, I cannot believe with all the traveling Harry does, picking up and finishing the 7 books hasnt happened . <br><br> Personally HBP is my favorite book. I guess thats why I wasnt 100% impressed with the movie. I have high standards for it. WTF does Harry know about it? <br><br> I wouldn't dare review a movie like Twilight (just and example) which has a huge following BECAUSE OF A BOOK and post something like this. You have fallen the fuck off Harry.Do you realize how many people bash you and call you out? Man the fuck up.
July 15, 2009, 2:57 a.m. CST
For me, though, it was actually the supporting characters that stole this movie, Snape and Draco in particular (though props to Helena Bonham Carter's brilliant albeit brief return as Bellatrix). And I fell in love with the shot of Draco clad in all black purposefully and mechanically walking down the hallway on one side starkly contrasted with shadowed kids playing games, laughing, and making out on the other side. It highlighted his elevation from schoolyard bully to real adult enemy (with complicated adult decisions and responsibilities) all without saying a word. He's no longer part of that simple world of children. Ironic that his skin/hair and clothing tones are so black/white when his character is anything but. It's not hard to be good when you're expected to be good. It's harder when you come from a long line of Death Eaters from whom you not only fear for your life, but who you legitimately know, love, and wish to impress/make proud. His growing rage and frustration at being trapped are also really well laid out in the scene where he kicks Harry in the face and in the bathroom scene. I also loved every moment Alan Rickman was on the screen. It swings from the humorous to the heartbreaking (especially that last look he shoots Harry), and it it more than works every time.
July 15, 2009, 3:21 a.m. CST
After owning all the other movies in the series, finally picked up Part 2 only because it was priced at 4.99. Prisoner of Azkaban still stands apart from the other movies as the best.
July 15, 2009, 3:48 a.m. CST
You're going to have to look REALLY hard. Rickman doesn't get NEARLY enough face time, not even enough to explain the story of the HBP, which is, of course, the main point of the 6th book. That aspect of the film was horribly disappointing. I understand that the books have to be edited down for the screenplays, but let's at least stay focused on the main point of the story - the backstory of the HBP.
July 15, 2009, 4:42 a.m. CST
I thought the first 2 films were dull, but Curon's delapitated sepia-toned gothic look inspired me to read the book just before the film came out. So he cut out some exposition that Potter fans wanted left in, big deal. He saved a series for me that I had previously written off. Or maybe it's because there wasn't any more Lord of the Rings films coming out.
July 15, 2009, 5:22 a.m. CST
"It feels like something awful is coming. The entire time. It felt bad. It felt like it was going to hurt. But when that moment came, its handled so much from the vantage point of Harry Potter - that I felt an emphatic bond with Harry. I was a bit pissed off. I don't like that that character was... handled in that manner. And by betrayal. That hurt."<p>Winner: Most Inarticulate and Illiterate Internet Reviewer Award
July 15, 2009, 6:18 a.m. CST
Because nothing says Christmas time like the drunken crooning of a child abuser. <P> But seriously, I don't care how many memories this brings back for you Harry (and I don't mean that in a dick-ish way) but after the last two HP abortions, I'm gonna steer clear till I'm forced into watching this, just like all the previous films. For the record, I was bored to tears by the first, the 2nd film felt flat but to be honest I don't remember much of it.. the 3rd I actually really really enjoyed, the 4th was just fucking terrible and I still don't know what the fuck was the point of the 5th film.. WHAT THE HELL DID THEY DO?!? Soooo, yeah I'll pass.
July 15, 2009, 6:19 a.m. CST
by andrew coleman
Harry potter fans are bitching about things missing and stuff added. But in the end this movie had a serious style and really pushed the level of danger up to the point that Deathly Hollows will be epic. (SPOILERS!!!)I know that fight at the end was cut but I feel like it's better that way. I always saw that part made the villains look pathetic. In the film they seem unstoppable at the end and that really worked. Good stuff all around. I was happy to see a solid summer film. Sadly this is the only one really.
July 15, 2009, 6:23 a.m. CST
For an ending that was that heavy, there was a surprising lack of an impending sense of doom. I thought the death of (SPOILER. Is this really necessary?) Dumbledore was handled tastefully, but everything leading up to that was done quietly--enough for the fans of the books to realize, but for someone who hasn't picked them up yet (i.e. me), the tension leading up to it was a bit lost on me. Like most people here, I despised the first two and passed them off as children fodder. The Cuaron take on Azkaban really hooked me. I thought the aesthetic/look of the film was perfect for the darker tone in the material. The scene where Gary Oldman makes his triumphant appearance is, in my opinion, the best and truly most cinematic scene in all of the series. The only other scene that matches close to that is Cedric's death/Voldermort's return in 'Goblet'. I think both of those scenes worked because both of those movies understood that the tone and themes of the film must remain consistent. I did not really like 'Order' (mostly because Sirius' departure was weak) and I don't even need to mention the first two. I do, hwoever, think that 'Half-Blood Prince' was quite enjoyable. I laughed a lot and I genuinely wanted to see waht would happen next. The ending, as epic as it was, didn't really effect me the way I thought it would. I do like how dark it has turned and hope the last two flicks keep with a consistent tone. Oh, and one last thing, I LOVE Alan Rickman as Snape in this one. I can't wait to see what's in store for him.
July 15, 2009, 6:28 a.m. CST
Anybody have any idea what the fuck Harry just wrote?
July 15, 2009, 7:30 a.m. CST
Should I cram the previous movies to see this new one? Would I enjoy this new movie as a stand-alone movie? <P>Quite honestly, I lacked enough interest after seeing the first Potter flick. Though now, I may give the aeries a chance. --Maybe.
July 15, 2009, 7:31 a.m. CST
I hate typos. I'm not even gonna correct myself.
July 15, 2009, 7:48 a.m. CST
I haven't seen this one yet (just came out today), but the 3rd is *easily* the best, most complete movie in the bunch at least not including this one. I think people sometimes get confused or fool themselves by thinking the more recent movies are better simply because they're more "mature," but AvP is more "mature" than TOY STORY. I don't think anyone is daft enough to say it's better. The gap between the HP flicks isn't that wide, but it is fairly substantial. Anyway, I'm not interested to see how it compares myself. :-)
July 15, 2009, 7:48 a.m. CST
by Grammaton Cleric Binks
The Prisoner of Azkaban is there is just not enough depth. Not only do the books keep getting longer, but they add more characters while at the same time adding more depth and backstory to the existing characters. Even if the movies are three hours there's not enough time. Thank goodness Deathly Hallows will be two parts, but that's no guarantee. Order of the Phoenix was the absolute worst adaptation as they cut away so much meat from the books. No movie adaptation will ever please every reader, but the Potter films are becoming blatantly bad compared to the books. Half-blood is one of the best books. I'll see the movie, but I'm praying it's not a butcher job.
July 15, 2009, 7:49 a.m. CST
July 15, 2009, 7:49 a.m. CST
not = now.
July 15, 2009, 7:51 a.m. CST
Wha-wha-what? That was totally out of left field, unless you're series7 (oh how I pity you if you are *shutter*) but why is my mommy looking for me? is everything O.K.? I've also read your posts and I decided you're less than competent. Peace.
July 15, 2009, 7:58 a.m. CST
Read the books and then watch the movies Harry, like a normal person. Maybe then it'll sound like you have a clue what you're talking about.
July 15, 2009, 8:19 a.m. CST
by What The Duck
I just don't understand why you would not read the books first. These reviews are worthless to people who have. Of course anybody who hasn't read the books are gonna think these fils are good. If these were original movies they would be great! But anybody who is the know feel that are subpar at best. Pick up a book and enjoy! IF YOU DON't READ THE LAST ONE YOU WILL BE DOING YOURSELF A GREAT DIS-SERVICE!
July 15, 2009, 9:25 a.m. CST
the first page. HP is just to juvenile for me. Believe me, if I were a teen I would have been all over these books. But, since I didn't have JK Rowlings when I was young, I had to suffice reading Tolkien.
July 15, 2009, 9:34 a.m. CST
And he didn't even put an exclamation point on the headline!!!! Holy Fuck!!!!
July 15, 2009, 9:35 a.m. CST
You were actually SUPPOSED to feel all those things toward the characters, situations, the sense of foreboding - alla it. I've heard (because I've not seen it yet) that the last bit of the book is being put at the first of the next film. I'm a bit relieved to hear that actually. You have another couple of years to prep yourself for the losses that will be coming, but there's some good stuff, too. Hopefully they will remain true, like they've said they would. But their word is like water.
July 15, 2009, 9:41 a.m. CST
I suggested your mom is looking for you because you're acting like a preteen around here, stalking Series7 from talkback to talkback to toss insults at him when he never said anything to you. Totally immature. <p> And you decided I'm less than competent based on my posts on this Talkback? Hehe, you're so laughable.
July 15, 2009, 9:49 a.m. CST
So I saw the midnight show last night and I definitely thought it was a good movie - Laughed a lot and the actors all did a good job (Draco has become real wierd looking) SPOILERS: But did anybody else who has seen this think it was strange at the end how Snape saw Harry watching underneath Draco and Dumbledore and motioned him to be quiet? It almost seems like a dead giveaway to Snape's true nature. I remember finishing the 6th book and not being completely sure whether Snape was good or bad - but with this one added moment in the movie, it feels like it's taken away all the questions and surprise - almost like they didn't trust that the audience would be okay with a lingering suspision. Is it just me? Or was my brain too shut down at 2:30 in the morning after downing a bunch of Captain & Cokes? :) First time posting in one of these if anybody cares.
July 15, 2009, 10 a.m. CST
I'm amused by all those people who say that a review is worthless if the reviewer hasn't read the books. I mean how many of you read Fletch before seeing the movie? The books are decent. Neither the divine word that some people glorify or the tripe that some people trample on. Movies are a different medium. If a movie can't work independent of the written work than it is a shitty movie. Whether people think the movies are great, horrible or somewhere in between... go for it. But to discount a reviewer because he hasn't read the book? That's just feckless.
July 15, 2009, 10:05 a.m. CST
That seems to be the logic here with people who say you can't enjoy the Potter films without reading the books first. COME ON. I guess you'd better read Wizard of Oz or you won't understand why in the movie the Scarecrow wanted a brain and crap. Hell if the producers had stuck to the Oz book there never would have been a song like "Over The Rainbow" in it, because nary a rainbow is even mentioned in the book. I get tired of people thinking the Potter tomes are so sacred, so sancrosanct, so akin to the the New Testament that they MUST be portrayed word for word on screen or the movies shall suck - those people need to get a grip. I could barely put up with a lot of Rowling's scribblings on paper. Seeing Hermione crusade for house-elf rights onscreen (and actually HEARING some of Rowling's accompanying "humor") would have been sheer torture for me. Thank god that crap was thrown out. I am now having serious second thoughts about seeing this movie. Not much Snape and a whole lot of stupid illogical Hermione-inexplicably-mooning-over-Ron. Gak!!! I'd rather cringe through Twilight again!
July 15, 2009, 11:16 a.m. CST
Listen seriesvader since you decided to take up series 7/your cause I turn my attention to you. I did not toss insults at him/you I call him/you out for ignorant and bigoted comments in another TB forum. Comments that were grossly sub human. So feel free to defend that if you wish but I will hunt down and shine a light on such ignorance. If deciding you're less than competent in a TB forum makes me laughable...OoooooKay ya got me.
July 15, 2009, 11:23 a.m. CST
Is funny enough. <p> Listen, these Talkbacks are full of far worse vitriol than what Series tossed at Rupert Grint. Its actually very amusing the level of dislike he has for the actor. You may try to paint what you said as just "calling him out", but really, in doing so you insulted him, and you continued to follow him around to other talkbacks to keep it going. Its immature. Sure, what he said was immature too, but what you're doing is far worse. <p> And yes, it does make you laughable. Thanks =).
July 15, 2009, 12:19 p.m. CST
by Lost Jarv
Bound to be shit film. Said it before, but it really is Harry Potter and the Sordid Wank Fantasy. <P>For 600 pages. <P>Fuck that.
July 15, 2009, 12:34 p.m. CST
For those complaining about the lack of backstory included in this movie, isn't it possible that some of that could be addressed in the last two films, which I've seen many of you say will amount to little more than five hours of camping in the forest if it's a completely faithful adaptation? I basically can't trust the opinion of anyone who has read the books. I haven't, and I've had no problems following along with the movies. I'll review them on their own merits.
July 15, 2009, 12:37 p.m. CST
by What The Duck
He is complaing that not enough info is in the movie regarding other people around Harry. I feel reading the books would help him out. The books will always be superior to these films.
July 15, 2009, 12:51 p.m. CST
by The Pusher
I get that they're trying to include as much of the books as they can with these, but there's seriously not enough plot in this film to justify it being 153 goddamn minutes long. The core plot was fine, but so much of it went nowhere or only served to set up the next film, and after six of these I'm starting to get a little annoyed with it all.
July 15, 2009, 12:54 p.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
I ADORE the post-Columbus Potter films, but I do think you are right. If one looks at the Star Wars films for comparison, really massive things happen in each film. (Even Episode 1.) So far, not much seemed to happen in Chamber of Secrets, which I hated, and Order of the Phoenix, which I loved, still didn't feel like it advanced things much. (I think that's why I loved Azkaban and Goblet, they really feel like movies rather than episodes in a brilliant TV series.)
July 15, 2009, 1:03 p.m. CST
by just pillow talk
What da fuck you doing in a Potter thread?
July 15, 2009, 1:08 p.m. CST
by The Pusher
Pretty much, yeah. I had the same problem with Order of the Phoenix, but after seeing half Blood Prince, I realize how much better the former one was in terms of plot. There wasn't much, but at least there was some kind of trajectory to it.
July 15, 2009, 1:22 p.m. CST
He'd love to snort his cocaine off Emma Watson. And bitch slap Radcliffe & the ginge.
July 15, 2009, 1:38 p.m. CST
Harry, please post your thoughts when you read the books -- I can't wait for you to read them, either!
July 15, 2009, 1:46 p.m. CST
July 15, 2009, 2:08 p.m. CST
July 15, 2009, 2:47 p.m. CST
July 15, 2009, 2:52 p.m. CST
Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review Public Enemies review
July 15, 2009, 2:57 p.m. CST
Just asking. It seems reasonable that years ago, if he liked what he was seeing on the screen, he might have jumped into the books to really see what the HP world was about. <p> I had never actually read any LOTR until I saw Fellowship. Afterward, I gobbled up TT and ROTK, and went back and read Hobbit and Fellowship. Since then, I've read each 3 times and would have been incredibly remiss to have missed out on so muchother detail had I only stuck to the movies. <p> So, I ask, why the hell hasn't Harold read the books? Too big? (ahem, the books, that is)
July 15, 2009, 3:12 p.m. CST
cause I hated The Hobbit, but the movies were excellent. I read the books in a few weeks.
July 15, 2009, 3:16 p.m. CST
Scottish Highlands for J K Rowlings
July 15, 2009, 3:24 p.m. CST
I could not put the last book down when I got it! It was fukin kick ass!
July 15, 2009, 3:32 p.m. CST
but it wasn't the best. Honestly, my only real gripe with it was the lack of action. The book had plenty of action in it and they took most of it out of the movie. Made no sense to me at all. I think HP4 and 5 were better than this. But again, it was still a fun movie and I will be buying it on DVD for sure, along with TF2, Terminator Salvation, and Star Trek.
July 15, 2009, 3:37 p.m. CST
I will wait till Blu-Ray version. I salute your will to wait to read these Harry, the books are so much more then movies.
July 15, 2009, 4:09 p.m. CST
Harry captures the tone of the film correctly. I just finished reading books 6 & 7 and read some of the series before and after seeing the films. Books always rule over films due to details. David Lynch was correct in saying "Dune" would have to be 22 hours long to capture the book correctly. HP films are pretty close, the tightest book to film in my opinion has been "Silence of the Lambs". In closing Transformers 2 put me to sleep twice and the Mom should have been on the editor's floor. After openine sequence on China the movie tanked.
July 15, 2009, 4:16 p.m. CST
Here: http://tiny.cc/cr0OR http://www.dangerousminds.net/index.php/site/comments/richard_metzgers_tell_it_like_it_is_review_of_harry_potter_and_the_half-blo/
July 15, 2009, 5:29 p.m. CST
way to not give a review...again Harry just relate everything to something that has happened in your life.. which i think is rather dull... talk about the movie, jesus...
July 15, 2009, 5:30 p.m. CST
Tom Felton kicked ass in HBP..
July 15, 2009, 5:30 p.m. CST
Funny, frightening in parts and superb to look at.
July 15, 2009, 5:34 p.m. CST
Hey listen, we're not gonna agree on this. His vitriol against not just Grint but people of the Mormon (I'm not of the Mormon faith or any organized denomination) just came across as hurtful but I could be wrong maybe he just thinks he's funny. His stink just rubbed me the wrong way. I'm Not even politically correct or particularly highbrowed. I like a good dirty roast, I just think this venue and it's anonymity breed an unnecessary cruelty. Any way we should be here to discuss movies, I got off track. That said, I actually think this trailer looks very cool.
July 15, 2009, 5:51 p.m. CST
You think JK Rowling is a "genius"? The only thing "genius" about Rowling is how she managed to become filthy stinkin' rich ripping off a hundred better authors who actually were geniuses. What is 'genius' about her other than that? Plus, I demand to know your top five favorite books you've read. I guess she's "genius" if the only other books you've read are the "Twilight" series.
July 15, 2009, 6:01 p.m. CST
How could you not have read the books yet?! God, Harry, I thought you were cool! Ya gotta read 'em. I read the first one years ago when my wife bought it for me while I was home sick. I've read them all, and they each get progressively better. Contrary to what some people have said, they are quite enjoyable. Look, Rowling's ideas are hardly original. A dumbed down, high concept description would be "Charles Dickens meets Charles Xavier". But the way she executes this conceit is engrossing. I'm looking forward to this installment and the next.
July 15, 2009, 6:04 p.m. CST
Not how I imagined it in the book, but then again, I kinda like that. It's like more bang for your buck that you get an entertaining book series and then an entertaining movie series based off of those books. I'm not complaining.
July 15, 2009, 6:26 p.m. CST
They are, indeed, family films. And by the nature of the storylines, things had to get darker, I've been told by those who read all the books - no way around it. Of course. Includes deaths you don't want and more.
July 15, 2009, 6:39 p.m. CST
I have a co-worker who stated the other day that he didn't like HP, Star Trek, Star Wars, LotR, etc. He just likes action movies. My first impulse was to tell him he was a soulless abomination and must be destroyed. All I could say is "Well, not everybody gets into 'em." I like a variety of things. I'm not saying the books are must reading. But they were a pleasant diversion from the stuff I usually read. Rowling took some old concepts and made them engaging for a whole generation. People who are looking for some kind of transcendent experience are overlooking the simple idea of a story well told.
July 15, 2009, 6:49 p.m. CST
Thanks for writing such a thoughtful review. It's well-appreciated.
July 15, 2009, 7:19 p.m. CST
The last 20 minutes it just sort of went flaccid and petered out loke OOTP, the last 10 minutes should have been straight bad ass action but instead we got a limp dick ending.
July 15, 2009, 7:21 p.m. CST
We are essentially saying the same thing, albeit my tone is more calling Rowling out, and yours is more apologist but we are both saying (if you see my original post that prompted supercowbell to respond calling JK a "genius") that I said JP is clever, endearing, fun and they go down easy, but 'genius'?? Biiitccchhh, pleeeeassee.
July 15, 2009, 7:30 p.m. CST
by Henry Fool
I just saw the film and loved it. My only huge complaint was that there was a big battle at Hogwarts after the betrayal/death scene. That got downplayed in this movie and the whole meaning of the Half Blood Prince didn't really carry over too well. But I LOVED the dark, gothic tone of the film and thought it was very intelligently written and played out. David Yates is emerging as a terrific film director and I look forward to seeing what he does after he wraps up the Potterverse. I'm glad he was tapped to direct all the post-Goblet films in the series because of the darkness he brings. His entries may not be as pleasant to watch at the early films but evil isn't supposed to make you feel good. I loved the way they portrayed Fenrir Greyback. They never say his name but the actor who played him sure was creepy looking. And Helena Bonham Carter is a lot more fun as Bellatrix than she was in the last outing. All in all, I definitely got my money's worth.
July 15, 2009, 7:36 p.m. CST
by --- Emperor ---
Harry, why the fuck did you delete my posts? What kind of rubbish are you running here?
July 15, 2009, 7:39 p.m. CST
Before tossing around the word ignorant, reread your post above. Where you used the word *shutter* instead of perhaps SHUDDER!!!!
July 15, 2009, 7:42 p.m. CST
by --- Emperor ---
My bad. It was Quint's review, not yours. I actually think yours is better. Reflects the way I felt about the film also. Except, I didn't really like it, i was simply "ok" with it. And judging by the attention these films have gotten, that is simply not good enough.
July 15, 2009, 7:42 p.m. CST
July 15, 2009, 8:26 p.m. CST
I'm gonna let that apologist comment slide, since we're basically on the same wavelength here. I never apologize for anything I like. As you stated, it has its merits. Honestly, I wouldn't go as far as proclaiming it creative genius. But a clever entertainment.
July 15, 2009, 9:34 p.m. CST
i'd give the first 3/4 of this movie a glowing review, and the horcrux retrieval sequence was incredible, but what the hell were they thinking with harry's "chase" at the end. In the book, this sequence established harry's power and coming of age as a wizard (he was on par with any of the death eaters in combat), while in this he just runs for a bit and then gets knocked down. i am absolutely stunned by the utter shittiness of this movie's final act. harry uses a death charm on a fellow student and suffers no repurcussions.
July 15, 2009, 9:50 p.m. CST
July 15, 2009, 10:21 p.m. CST
July 15, 2009, 10:24 p.m. CST
Yet again, Hollywood screenwriters show an uncanny knack for emphasizing the wrong things. The title of the book is called The Half-Blood Prince for a reason, and yet the movie is more concerned about snogging, and the ending sucked ass.
July 15, 2009, 10:41 p.m. CST
by LT Weezie
WHY OH WHY didn't they go ahead and FILM the segments from the books with the intention of re-editing them back in when the BLU RAY and DVDs are released. Peter Jackson did a great job of this and although there are still a lot of important areas missing, like Tom of the Forest, the extended cuts are amazing for all the LOTR films! How much more would the Harry Potter films mean to all of us if they were even truer to the books!
July 15, 2009, 10:44 p.m. CST
And that's saying a lot, coming from me. I'm one of those crazy fuckers who read the entire series each time a new book was released. I've re-read the last book and then the entire series in the time since the last film. I don't have much to say other than I think, for the first time, that you're riding along with "us" with your reactions. Most of the feelings you expressed, I think, would be considered "right" and are pretty common amongst fans. It's just too bad it took the films this long to instill all those feelings and emotions, because the books have had them all along. I still think that Prisoner of Azkaban comes closest to the correct tone, but too much was still left out. And while I understand how and why Order of the Phoenix is a great film, THAT'S the one that should have started the two per book concept. Leaving (MUCH) more of that book in the film(s) would have carried over to films six and seven. But like I always say, I'm just happy that there's still films to look forward to, and your review added to my happiness. :)
July 15, 2009, 10:50 p.m. CST
They haven't done it lately because they didn't do it to begin with. They didn't do it to begin with because they were child actors and the producers had a hard enough time dealing with child labor laws and a shitload of kids being kids. Those are the only reasons I've ever heard for this CLEAR miss on WB part. You KNOW they would have done this if they thought they could because it would have brought them another billion or so in profits from DVD and Blu-Ray.
July 15, 2009, 10:52 p.m. CST
Did a great job with the fourth film and, evidently, the fifth, seeing as how they brought him back for two more. Unfortunately, I think the
July 15, 2009, 10:55 p.m. CST
Yates did a great job with the fifth film and, evidently, the sixth, seeing as how they brought him back for two more. Unfortunately THEY butchered the story in the book in ways that can't even be described in the fifth film. Also, I hear that they actually ADDED some sizable scenes in HBP, which just makes no kinda sense. However, don't be fooled into thinking that anybody other than WB is in complete control at ALL TIMES. These are not "artistic visions", they're cash cows. I guarantee you nothing happens without 752 people at WB who have no clue about books giving the OK.
July 15, 2009, 10:56 p.m. CST
July 15, 2009, 11:02 p.m. CST
At this point anybody who can't recognize the greatness of these books and what they've done for the book loving public at large is just being a hater for haters sake. If you don't like them, that's totally cool. I'm all about free will. But saying things like, "they suck" is completely moronic if you can't explain why you think they suck. More to the point, if you can't explain why they suck to the myriad college professors around the globe who have studied them, built entire classes around them and regularly proclaim their greatness, then maybe you should actually sit down and read them before inserting both feet in your mouth at the same time. I've said before, there is VERY little that is new in these books, and JK herself admits this. But what she did create IS genius. The way she used mankind's entire history of legends and myths to create her own world over the top of ours, genius. And the way she put the story arch together over the seven books, extreme genius. If you think otherwise I challenge you to do the same. See if you can even get somebody, ONE PERSON, to bother reading your seven books, let alone create a world-wide phenomenon with them.
July 15, 2009, 11:39 p.m. CST
Look up the word ignorant before you bring up my spelling "mistake" *sigh*
July 15, 2009, 11:47 p.m. CST
The ending should have been a solid twenty minutes of operatic chaos and tragedy on an epic scale. All other flaws are totally forgivable, but I missed the full impact of the siege on Hogwarts. I'd say it's the second best film behind POA, but it should have been the number one considering HBP was the best of the novels. Still though it was pretty impressively made and achieved so I'm fairly satisfied.
July 15, 2009, 11:48 p.m. CST
This is the best of the 6 so far. It's a close call with 3. And Albus reached Gandalf bad assness in the cave. I can't choose between who I like more anymore. I'm sure I'll go back and forth depending on what I'm reading or watching at the time.
July 16, 2009, midnight CST
Your "mistake" wasn't misspelling, it was using a word that had no relevance to what was being written. Double *sigh*<P>I looked up the word ignorant, in part it said: people who don't own up to their mistakes, a.k.a. cheesegrommit!
July 16, 2009, 12:17 a.m. CST
is what the film should be called.
July 16, 2009, 1:20 a.m. CST
I saw HBP today and had the same feeling I had throughout the OOTP---nothing. I loved the first four movies, but with these last 2 I watched them with almost no emotion at all. Even the death at the end had no emotional impact. Yates has drained almost all the life out of the story. The fake colors, the bland mopey music, everything seemed so blah.<break> And I realise cuts have to be made for time, but he added a scene not in the book and it added NOTHING to the movie. Why not put in the funeral or at least the damned battle at the end? So many funny or crucial points were left out it's ridiculous. In part 7 will Harry just find a note from Dumbledore telling him where he thinks the Horcruxes are? There's no Tonks and Lupin romance--they're just shown as if they'd always been together. No Bill and Fleur. Fenrir looks terrible and might as well not even be in the movie, because he adds nothing to it--I don't even think they mentioned his name or the fact he's a werewolf--certainly not that he made Lupin a werewolf.<break>No Dursleys, even though if memory serves me, this was the best Dursley encounter ever, where Dumbledore shows up and puts them in there place about how they treat Harry.<break>The cave scene was ok but the inferi looked like Gollum ripoffs and it ended with a jump to Harry and Dumbledore back at Hogwarts--no Hogsmeade. I'm so pissed about the fight being left out where Luna, Neville and the others show their bravery and loyalty. The young romance parts were pretty good and funny, and Snape had some good parts, but this movie should have been sooooo much better--it was one of my favorite of the books. I can't believe this guy's doing the next 2 movies, too.They should have dumped him after part 5.<break>And as someone mentioned above, why the hell haven't they, since part 1, been filming the cut scenes from the book for an extended DVD? So many dvds come out with so-called extended versions that have nothing new to give. These could add an extra hour or so of great material and fans would pay. As greedy as studios are I can't believe these morons haven't thought of this. It seems to have worked pretty well for LOTR. Sorry so long, but if any of you loved the books like I did, I hope you don't get your hopes up too much.
July 16, 2009, 1:29 a.m. CST
Pure acting all the way through. Excellent character development. Loved the cinematography. There was very little action and it still moved very fast (unless you're a dipshit like Lockesbrokendick and you can't watch a movie without explosions and shakycam editing).
July 16, 2009, 1:59 a.m. CST
You would enjoy this movie. It's dull, lifeless, and made people that like to dress up in wizard costumes.
July 16, 2009, 2:49 a.m. CST
I love stories where things happen that make no sense, but later get explained and you think, oh! aha! wow!
July 16, 2009, 2:57 a.m. CST
holy fucking shit!!!!!!!!!!!!!
July 16, 2009, 3:04 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
I deffo understand your disappointment with those scenes missing - I had forgotten them when I saw the film last night as I only read the book once, when it came out. But now you mention them, those ARE great scenes and I can quite see why you miss them. HOWEVER, I really loved the movie. I thought the three kids were fantastic; Jim Broadbent amazing as Slughorn; the two inserted action scenes were fabulous; and the whole tone of the thing just made the world so very real to me. That's the point that really makes this film, IMHO, really special - the world had been totally brought to life in terms of the feel, the menace out there, but still the personal concerns. I love all the films from Azkaban onward, but feel that this is way better than Yates' first effort. Also, I love the fact that he's not trying to be George Lucas or Steven Spielberg (a charge that could be levelled at JJ Abrams in STAR TREK) or even Peter Jackson - this felt like a blockbuster that wouldn't have been made ten or even five years ago. And that was quite exciting!
July 16, 2009, 3:25 a.m. CST
Go see Transformers 2 again. Have fun.
July 16, 2009, 3:26 a.m. CST
I know you can't get enough of those.
July 16, 2009, 4:54 a.m. CST
Well the usual Potter movie, good but should have been better. I only hope WB is planning an animated series with seven seasons, one for each book. Imagine a Quidditch uniform that remains the same for six years instead of being changed every time there is a new director? The most depressing thing is that this movie is still head and shoulders above most other movies.
ROBE are you the caps-lock reincarnation of TITBAG?<p> I never noticed the Quidditch uniform changed every time there is a new director. Thank god. If i'd noticed that...whew.. would have UTTERLY WRECKED the films for me.
July 16, 2009, 6:22 a.m. CST
by just pillow talk
Imagine the awards to be had IF they didn't change...wait for it...the uniforms! Dammit all to hell!<p>Me thinks the way they apparently shortchanged the ending should bother you more than quidditch uniforms being changed.
July 16, 2009, 7:16 a.m. CST
he took what could've been a great movie and wiped his ass with it. then millions of us were suckered into seeing it in the theatres. there was so much cut from the books that would've made this movie great. instead of keeping the scenes in the movie this asshole decided to try and make the potter series into twlight (wtf is that all about? twilight sucks too.).
July 16, 2009, 7:29 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
The ending was fine. Dumbledore gets his moment, don't you worry. The film leaves you wanting more, which is quite an achievement. Yates writes about it - they had scripted the funeral but it just didn't feel it was right for the film in terms of rhythm or pace, and in his words he 'had to respect the medium'. Film is much more structural than books, in that a film is watched in a single 90-180 min viewing, while a book could be read in a single sitting or over a number of weeks.
July 16, 2009, 7:34 a.m. CST
I think the worst thing for me is the way they portrayed Ginny. In the book, she's a real firebrand of a character, and she doesn't take crap from anyone, especially her brothers. You can see why Harry would be attracted to her. In the movie, poor Bonnie Wright doesn't have much to do except make googly eyes at Harry in a few scenes.
July 16, 2009, 8:08 a.m. CST
Really? That's your argument? I didn't know the difference between shutters on a window and to shudder shake? God your stupidity knows no bounds. I mean really! You are an absolutely unintelligent person. The fact that you chose to engage me in verbal combat by jumping into a conversation that didn't involve you and you had nothing to say proves you're an igit oh wait you might think I don't know how to spell idiot....
July 16, 2009, 8:37 a.m. CST
...were pretty dull but overall a great movie and probably the best of the series or a close second to POA. The acting was superb and the cinematography/art design was excellent. The humor was spot on. I also felt this was the first movie to lose a good deal of the "cute" factor with it's far more serious tone.
July 16, 2009, 8:52 a.m. CST
And I've watched all of the movies. Same formula eery time. Yawn. Books for people who don't read books.
July 16, 2009, 9:19 a.m. CST
"Books for people who don't read books." It's like people calling Rowling a "hack" or something. It might be cute and a little entertaining to call attention to oneself by saying such a thing but don't expect to be taken any more seriously than a pantsless person ranting that the world is flat. Being able to have any opinion you want doesn't mean all opinions are created equal. In the face of how these books are embraced, and in the context of the type of material this site is founded on, sheesh... I can feel the disappointment one of the posters had above with what they wanted to see from the book but was left out but the way a film is constructed really makes things like asides illustrating Tonks and Lupin's romance (it was still given a line to establish it), Bill/Fleur, Dursley's etc. are a bit indulgent and don't really propel a film forward, where momentum is crucial. I also think the funeral in the context of the movie would have been largely redundant to the "removal of the dark mark" scene but I do think they could have injected a bit more of the Order and Aurors (sp) taking on the Death Eaters once they infiltrate - it was glossed over a bit too much and the whole HBP subplot needed just a little more massaging too - it is the title of the movie after all. Thankful we won't have to wait as long for the next installment but for those that haven't read it's worth it to get in there now so you aren't spoiled by some online or media discussion of where this is all headed. It makes the movie watching better I've found and I didn't read any until this last one (HBP).
July 16, 2009, 9:31 a.m. CST
..you can read a lot of books and then read Potter and think it's good writing. Its poorly structured. Stretched to fit this absurd "seven book" thing Rowling wanted to satisfy. She could have told this story in three books maximum. So she ends up repeating herself and stalling the inevitable. To me that is just poor writing and only people who don't read often think it's brilliant.
July 16, 2009, 9:46 a.m. CST
It's pretty specious to only allow something that is subjectively characterized as "brilliant" to be enjoyable or entertaining. This series did start with a clearly defined target audience and has gently pushed outward from there over time. Too many of the criticisms I see aren't willing to meet the material on its own turf.
July 16, 2009, 9:46 a.m. CST
Who said that the books "suck'? Nice strawman argument there. I said that they were clever and endearing but unoriginal, which you and you say JK admits as well. Done deal. I also said that the only "genius" of JK is that she was able to make herself the most richest woman in England ripping off the entire fantasy genre. Again, done deal. BUT. Given your obvious mongoloid level of reading comprehension regarding even AICN posts, it is no small wonder then that you think of JK and these books as "genius and extreme genius." Biiittcchh Pleeaasseee. Have you even read Tolkien? The man created whole other languages, and a whole zoo of NEW fantastic, creatures, he incorporated beautiful poetry (Theoden's "Where is the Horse and the Rider?"), he incorporated prose on the level of Shakespeare (Again, Theoden's speech before the troops "Ride now! Ride! Ride to ruin's and world's ending! Because Tolkien had actually been in a war and new firsthand it's horrors for crying out loud!) THAT'S genius. NOTHING JK has written has even come close. As for "myriad" of Professors in colleges teaching Harry Potter in University settings. Yeah, there's also a Beatleology class, too. So I call bullshit on that point. You will NOT find Potter taught in IVY LEAGUE schools but you WILL find Shakespeare, Tolkien, in curriculums. And your point about whether or not I could do it, is just fucking idiotic and yet another strawman argument (tho I doubt you know what "strawman argument" means). I NEVER said I could do it dipshit. And I said I already concede her true "genius" is making herself filthy stinking rich ripping off others, but I don't even have to do it because REAL literary geniuses already did do it BEFORE Rowling and she ripped them off. I think you've just jacked off to Hermione while auto-asphysxiating yourself with your red and gold Gryffindor scarf too many times to actually understand how fucking stoopid you must be to even consider the HP books literary works of "extreme genius." Popular, clever, endearing entertainment? You betcha. "Extreme genius"??? You just made a TOTAL ass of yourself and you need to STFU.
July 16, 2009, 9:49 a.m. CST
Not true. "The Hobbit" was clearly aimed for the same youthful age group as the first HP books, but would ANYONE with ANY knowledge of literary history actually put these two books on the same level of "GENIUS"?
July 16, 2009, 9:58 a.m. CST
I agree. I envision such a *great* climax, where Harry is running past every duel, every friend who is trying to fend off a Death Eater, every student who is getting beaten, every teacher who is falling, because he is so obsessed with catching up to Snape. He has a singular purpose at that moment; he let Bellatrix get away in the last film, and he's going to be sure he doesn't let Dumbledore's killer get away in this one. <p> Moments like that would be epic. But instead, Yates prefers his action sequences neutered for some reason. Which REALLY makes me fear for the next two films. Sure, the acting and character interactions will be great, but he's still preventing these films from living up to their potential.
July 16, 2009, 10 a.m. CST
All his "reasons" for leaving things out just sound like excuses to me. <p> Really? You couldn't have that last conversation occur as the funeral was going on in the background?
July 16, 2009, 10:01 a.m. CST
Draco's cupboard thing is rendered pointless. And the twists are rendered limp. Frustrating. Nobody wants limp and frustrating, not in any context
July 16, 2009, 10:17 a.m. CST
Hmmm a closet/cupboard that magically transports people somewhere? Wherever did JK come up with THAT? Wow, a WARDROBE-esque transporting device. EXTREME GENIUS, I say!!
July 16, 2009, 10:58 a.m. CST
The final scene (which still would have been abrupt) would've benefited from some "grab your gear, we're going to get Pippin and Merry back" or "Batman has to run from the cops now" music. The tame music, though appropriate for the sadness we're feeling at that point, did nothing to acknowledge Harry and friends discussing leaving Hogwart's to search for the final Horcruxes.
July 16, 2009, 11 a.m. CST
GET A DAMN EDIT FUNCTION, HARRY!!!!! HOGWARTS WILL FOREVER BE ACCIDENTALLY POSSESSIVE IN MY POST AND I CAN'T TOLERATE THAT!!!!
July 16, 2009, 11:58 a.m. CST
I went to see the new harry potter last night and this movie runs nearly two and half hours long. The creators of this movie added parts that were not in the book and they left out some of the most important parts of the overall story that carry on into the next installment. The movie itself was fine and i have come to grips that the movies are supposed to be their own THING, but come on its an adaptation and to follow the story so close for so long and to leave out the most powerful parts of the book is ludacris. I am in just utter shock that they could do this. "Spoiler alert for the book" for those who have not read it. To leave out Snape teaching Harry to cast spells without speaking them, Tom Riddles family story through memories, the fight that takes place within the castle with the death eaters and Fenrir Greyback mauling Bill Weasly, and most importantly Dumbledores funeral. All these parts were key points that made my favorite book and carry on to the next. I am so disapointed. Not to mention they screwed up what happens to Harry while dumbledore is being murdered. They have done this a lot in the past movies and I have dealt with it becasue there is no way that they can fit all that into one movie but leave out some of the other stuff or make it 30 minutes longer I am sure Harry fans wouldnt mind I am just pissed off
July 16, 2009, 12:01 p.m. CST
...self-centered, over opinionated cunt! I did not address you directly ONE FUCKING TIME! Your own self-aggrandized opinion of yourself here at AICN is really disturbing. You do not matter. You are not important. If you can't make read other peoples opinions here without thinking they all apply to you then you should really seek some professional help. If you can't reply to said delusions without insulting people who NEVER ADDRESSED YOU then should just consider not posting until you've passed the 8th grade and/or moved past your minimum wage retail job and out of your mother's basement. Fucktard. Nothing you say matters to me in the slightest when you begin your response to SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT ADDRESSED TO YOU with an insult. I do not give on shit what you call bullshit on, because you're wrong, and YOU proved it with my post. Oh yeah, the Beatles totally suck. And oh geez, it's not an ivy league school, so it must not matter. You're a fucking joke, and it's not funny.
July 16, 2009, 12:10 p.m. CST
Somebody actually break down what's wrong with the books other than not liking the length, with is a subjective opinion. Personally, I wish she'd had the idea to write ten of 'em. Saying she could have done it in three, of course she could. If the fucking Bible was just one book, told in a narrative structure that is actually believable and makes sense some kind of sense, it would be a better read. Subjectively, this could be said of nearly every long novel, and many of the short ones, ever written. Great, they went through a transporting piece of furniture, must not be a good story. Oh shit, there's a wizard in this book! Well that's been done before, so no need to read these books. Seriously people, do you not understand that MOST of you just sound like high school bullies trying to get people to be part of your clique? Furthermore, it's painfully obvious to those of who have read and love the books when people are just using the movies as the basis to rip on the books. If you haven't sat down and read the books then kindly do so before you attempt to express an opinion about them.
July 16, 2009, 1:25 p.m. CST
i hope they (1) filmed it and will include it on the DVD somehow and (2) don't pull that shit with the end of Deathly Hallows!
July 16, 2009, 1:33 p.m. CST
You addressed the topic we were discussing, doesn't matter if it was ADDRESSED to me specifically or not, that means it's fair game. And dildo, don't spend 25 sentences telling me how my opinion doesn't matter and then expect me to give a shit about yours. And no, the Beatles are one of my favorite bands of all time. Does tha mean they are worthy of a university level history class based on them? I don't think so. Popular culture in general? Fine. But the Beatles specifically? No. Same with HP books. If you want to discuss them in a class about modern children's books that have captured the popular imagination? Fine. An entire semester's curriculum? Getthefuckouttahere. What college is that? Whatsamatta U.? And I already said what I don't like about the books, they lack originality (not one single original creature like say, Tolkien's Balrog. I may give you Voldemort, the snake-man wizard but that's really all I can think of.), the HP series lacks the poetry of say, Lewis Carrol (The "Jabberewocky"? "The Walrus and the Carpenter"), it lacks even possible parable (Baum's Wizard of OZ) unless of course you want to see Harry's cliche'd "Chosen One" status as some kind of hackneyed "Jesus," and the very prose of Rowling is pedantic and unmemorable. There are NO great, "Romeo, Romeo wherefore art thou, Romeo?" lines in the Saved By The Bell Rowling kid wizard romances. However, Tolkien, Carrol, Baum, Shakespeare are considered amazingly original works that if they didn't exist, there would be no HP. Oh, and go visit a library sometime and read The Odyssey, Gilgamesh, The Arthurian Legend,etc., then you'll get an idea of how much you just embarassed your illiterate ass. Tool.
July 16, 2009, 1:33 p.m. CST
by just pillow talk
How goes it?
July 16, 2009, 1:39 p.m. CST
by Homer Sexual
I am middle aged, and I read a lot. Comics, books, magazines, etc. <p> I read the first book, it was ok but certainly written for kids and I never planned to read another one. My then-wife was a Scholastic rep and had boxes of book 4, so I ended up reading it. Waaaay better than book 1...but still written for kids. <p> I never saw part 2, but part 5 was the only one of the others that I actually enjoyed, it seemed darker and faster moving. I am going to this tonight with friends, but I have low expectations. <p> Teen romance...not so interesting to me, but I can see why the filmmakers chose to go in this direction...I am not the intended audience.
July 16, 2009, 3:33 p.m. CST
We're not talking about Twilight here. I've read enough to know good and bad literature.
July 16, 2009, 3:34 p.m. CST
The beginning was a trip back to the end of the last one and it had to give it's proper ending up to the next two films so it had that weird "The Two Towers" thing happening where it was so much of a middle episode that it kind of failed to be a complete story. It was great though and I enjoyed it. It's just a pity that we all have to stop what we're doing for a year while we wait for the next one because the way they're turning the intensity up on these things really makes year long gaps in the story a problem. It wasn't so bad in the books but I think the movies will suffer a bit from that. This one does.
July 16, 2009, 3:50 p.m. CST
I've seen it twice already. I bet I had more fun at TF 2 than you did watching fake wizards make up shitty spells.
July 16, 2009, 3:59 p.m. CST
Way to make your points. Damned if I'm gonna go DefCon5 over Harry Potter...
July 16, 2009, 4:12 p.m. CST
And your Transformers... aren't fake? The magical matrix of leadership (which looks big in The Fallen's hands, but small in Shia's) is somehow less shitty than a Harry Potter spell?
July 16, 2009, 4:27 p.m. CST
What are wizard spells based on? Also, Jetfire explains that the robots can change sizes.
July 16, 2009, 4:48 p.m. CST
The scottish accented robot with the metal beard did explain the size issue. Transformers is totally not ridiculous now.
July 16, 2009, 4:50 p.m. CST
Spells are dumb because they aren't based on cars and planes.
July 16, 2009, 4:53 p.m. CST
July 16, 2009, 5:32 p.m. CST
by Turd Furgeson
I know its a pre req to be negative in tb's but frankly I thought it was well done. If you read the books there's always going to be dissapointments, however, it was by far the most cohesive of the 'big book' potter movies, buy a mile. And it made 58MM opening day, pretty good haul.
July 16, 2009, 6:23 p.m. CST
But they do have goofy places where you can "train" spells and sheet. That's a minus.
July 16, 2009, 6:24 p.m. CST
That is all...
July 16, 2009, 7:25 p.m. CST
What is Obi Wan to Luke if not Merlin to his Arthur with the lightsaber being Excalibur? "These are not the droids you're looking for." Levitating the x-wing. Force-choke. Until Lucas came up with the stoopid Midichlorians idea 20 years after the original trilogy, these examples could've all been seen as a form of magic or 'spells.'
July 16, 2009, 7:46 p.m. CST
by Sweet Action Hero
because they aren't based on cars and planes." learn something new everyday. unfortunately i think this was it.
July 16, 2009, 8:01 p.m. CST
we are all excited for Blood's a Rover aren't we?
July 16, 2009, 8:52 p.m. CST
I stopped reading at the mention of this brobdingnagian's name and skedaddled off to my hi-fi to spin some vinyl. What a talent! Hands down, by the numbers, the greatest entertainer of all time.
July 16, 2009, 9:39 p.m. CST
After the big moment, the theater was filled with silence for longer than I've ever experienced, except for the sounds of one girl sobbing.
July 16, 2009, 9:41 p.m. CST
from a book for half the movie.
July 16, 2009, 9:47 p.m. CST
Just sayin'. Actually, I forget what this debate was about.
July 16, 2009, 9:51 p.m. CST
So your argument is you knew you were using a word out of context, and because I pointed it out to you I'm an idiot. Really. If that's the case, then you're a MORON. More precisely, a moron of the nth degree. Look it up imbecile. And as being said moron, you'll probably keep posting, but I will no longer respond. Like talking to a wall......
July 16, 2009, 10:02 p.m. CST
How come there can be millions of Jedi and only two Sith? Didn't get it. I would have preferred the Jedi to be even smaller than what we got. The deaths would be had more impact.
July 16, 2009, 10:07 p.m. CST
I had no idea people had so much hate for these films/books. Are these the same people that claimed harry potter mania was falsee/over before the movie came out??? And then it sets box office records lol. Haters opinion taken with a grain of salt. I know sales don't mean anything, and aside from that, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, even with the things missing from the book. I'm just not cynic with my head stuck up my own ass it seems :/
July 16, 2009, 10:55 p.m. CST
I can't even be bothered to read one of his "reviews" anymore... It's like wiping jizz of my desktop... Oh and part 3 was weak...
July 16, 2009, 10:59 p.m. CST
Biggest scandal since midichlorians, I tell ya!
July 16, 2009, 11:05 p.m. CST
is that tolkien and cs lewis and many early fantasy writers "borrowed" or has he says stole, their ideas from earlier forms of legends or myths. Tolkien didn't invent dragons or giant spiders and as a reader of tolkien i don't recall there being a bestiary of great imagination. also many of his stories from the silmarillion were lifted from celtic and norse mythology. his invented languages is actually more like modified norse or welsh. that doesn't make him any less of a writer for one of the functions of art is to build on what came before it. its ridiculous to say she is "ripping them off" as much as it is to say that tolkien ripped off the unnamed bard who wrote beowulf. if he had actually read all those classics he named he would realize the silliness of these claims. jk rawling simply presents old ideas within a new mythology for a new time. so please shut the fuck up.
July 16, 2009, 11:06 p.m. CST
July 16, 2009, 11:07 p.m. CST
i wont argue that tolkien writes some nice powetry and has a beautiful way with words. the chronicles of narnia however, eh i could take em or leave em.
July 16, 2009, 11:26 p.m. CST
Never understood the Sinatra worship. Decent voice, okay actor, member of the mob. When I saw him on TV as a kid, he was a bloated, hoarse-voice shadow of his former self. Feh. But Crosby kept most of his voice and all of his Irish charm pretty much all of his life. Incredible voice, able to handle all genres, even opera. Great actor, comic and dramatic. His "Going My Way" is still one of my top faves in the old-time movie dept. "Swinging On A Star" was in the flick, love that tune, my fave of his next to "White Christmas". As for the child abuse stuff, depends on who's talking. His son Harry says none of that stuff actually took place, that his brothers were manic-depressive like their mother. We'll never know, I guess. But anyway I like Der Bingle. Harry, you got great taste in old-time radio shows and old-time torch singers. Ba-ba-ba-boo!
July 16, 2009, 11:47 p.m. CST
Im sorry, did you read The Bible before Passion of the Christ? Had you read American Psycho before the movie? Did you slog through Schindlers List? Of course books go into more detail... But getting all up on your high horse about making sure you read a book written for 12 year olds is just a fucking amazing waste of my time... I got through a chapter of Lord of the Rings before giving up on the ridiculously poetic language tolkien used… I gave up 1/2 way through reading Schindlers List... But I absolutely loved the movie... and own the limited edition LOTR DVDs... and can quote American Psycho word for word... and loved Passion of the Christ... Not having 'read the books' didn't take away from my ability to enjoy, understand or even discuss semantics with friends... All you book worms can fuck off...
July 16, 2009, 11:54 p.m. CST
either than you guys would have no problem discussing the semantics of it, don't bring that weak ass movie shit around a serious conversation about the differences between quenya and sindarin. you will have a problem with understanding and semantics.
July 16, 2009, 11:55 p.m. CST
July 17, 2009, 12:13 a.m. CST
When my life is sad enough to want to have a 'serious conversation' about the differences quenya and sindarin, I'd be worried...
July 17, 2009, 12:26 a.m. CST
At the end of this review, will Harry be soaking in jizz, or will it be runny fecal matter?
July 17, 2009, 12:57 a.m. CST
but have never read the books are the worst kind of nerd in my opinion. they rant and rave about how much they love the movies and then when you are like yeah they were great i really liked how they put this and this in from the book or that i thought this was a nice change they are like oh, reading lord of the rings is for tools.
July 17, 2009, 1:27 a.m. CST
dress up in a Damn Gollum Costume!
July 17, 2009, 2:02 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
OK, I actually do like reading books (which I secretly think he does too) but all this 'you must read the book of every film you see' shit is insane. If you think I am ever going to sit down and read Mario Puzo's THE GODFATHER, you dot another thing coming. Also, JURASSIC PARK was a book with such incredidbly lame characterisation, they need to name a whole new genre that is sub-airport novel. How many here sat down to read Beowulf in Old English before they went to see Zemeckis' cartoon? Oh, did you all read Jane Austen before you saw Ang Lee's Sense and Sensibility? I guess none of you allow your kids to see The Sound Of Music unless they have read a biography of Maria von Trapp and have a goon understanding of Hitler's annexation of Austria? Oh, and I for one didn't dream of seeing The Fast and the Furious before reading the newspaper article that inspired it...
July 17, 2009, 2:04 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
forgive the many mistakes. you can probably workout what was meant! now, forvive me, I have to go and play PRINCE OF PERSIA becuase I don't want to see Mike Newall's film before playing every single one of the games, so I can understand the source material.
July 17, 2009, 2:22 a.m. CST
I was bored of Barry plotter after the 3rd one. Do Do Do DoDo Do Do DoDoDo Do Do
July 17, 2009, 2:38 a.m. CST
July 17, 2009, 3:11 a.m. CST
Chris Columbus has actually picked good directors to adapt Harry Potter, heck, he even looked outside Hollywood, unlike Spielberg. The Potter films are not perfect, but they are respectful and thought has gone into them. Columbus at least understands the golden rule that you hire a director who LIKES the source material and understands what its about. And at least the title character is the main character in the movies, unlike Bay's Transformers, where the title characters are reduced to nothing roles.
July 17, 2009, 3:53 a.m. CST
That would be the most perfect casting ever. Alas that will never happen. And to make matters worse, Rebuild 2.0 turns Asuka into a bland moe called Shikinami.
July 17, 2009, 6:56 a.m. CST
July 17, 2009, 7 a.m. CST
its fucking drivel and you should know it..ok so it got some kids reading something other than online porn or the Bible...big fucking whooppee..the movies are embarassing, and the books (I freely admit i only attempted to wade through the idiocy that was the first) are neatly crafted piffle at the very best...shamelessly stealing from other great fantasy stories. Little boys and girls here will defend this shit until they're blue in the face, but a decade or so from now you mutherfuckers will look back at this shit and realise its not a patch on Tolkiens lightest fart.
July 17, 2009, 7:15 a.m. CST
by just pillow talk
Why are you even comparing this to Tolkien? They are not remotely the same besides having varying degrees of 'magic' in them. <p>Of course they are on different 'planes', if that makes you feel more comfortable with yourself. Hey, you read Tolkien. Good for fucking you. So have I...whoop-dee-fucking-doo. <p>These are lighter fare books that do get darker as the series gets on (which you have read none of), and a bit more mature in terms of content. <p>Does that make them on the level of more 'serious' fantasy fare? Hell no, but I fail to see why you feel the need to attack the series and compare it to Rings.
July 17, 2009, 7:23 a.m. CST
I'm still a bit of a bookworm myself, but i think that if a movie needs the book as clutch to help us understand it betwer and feed the plot holes, then the movie didn't do it's job properly. a movie should exist on it's own, without the need of the book to fill it in. It's poor filmmaking if that is so.<br><br> One thing is a movie comparing unfavourably to to the sourse material, like Watchmen, another is a movie that needs the book to have it's plot and themes and characters understood. This are two different things, and two different problems.
July 17, 2009, 9:39 a.m. CST
I would not say read the books to appreciate the movies. Nor are they must-read material. Read the books just to enjoy them. They are well-crafted, rich entertainment. A nice alternative to a lot of what passes for fantasy these days. There are worse ways to spend your time. Yeah, they're considered "juvenile" fiction and have recurring themes, but (stay with me here) a lot of great fiction was written about young folks, and can be repetitive. Geez, people who dismiss the Potter books as inconsequential have a hole in their soul. True.
July 17, 2009, 10:03 a.m. CST
I like to watch movies adapted from books before I read the books (if I read the books), because I don't have any expectations as to what "should" or "should not" be in the film. I can enjoy the movie for what it is. Then, I can enjoy the book if I want and I usually end up liking both the book and the movie that way.
July 17, 2009, 11:11 a.m. CST
Sometimes I read these talkbacks just to look at all the kickass user names. I specially like the ones that crack me up. In that category: Best AICN Username Evah = Stupidmop. Don't know why, but I laughed for like, minutes over that one. Supercowbell is also aces. And the header that stated "Supercowbell, you are an idiot" nearly put me on the floor. The redundancy was simply overwhelming. I love this site.
July 17, 2009, 11:17 a.m. CST
In one of my archeological diggings at AICN's past archives, i found one user who had the nick, i kid you not, Alien_Defecation. And the guy was as weird as the nick makes him look.
July 17, 2009, 11:54 a.m. CST
And it's not based on cars and planes?
July 17, 2009, 1:36 p.m. CST
Seriously..this is a cool news movie site anymore? In a week of comic con news, iron man photos, Jennifer's Body trailer..this site and its writers can barely manage the fucking will to write a review about Harry Potter that NO ONE reads and understands. It's like Harry is just writing a bunch of fucking one liners hoping to get on the TV Spots..It's fucking retarded..Wolverine was pretty much the end of AICN and it's just been downhill from six to midnight ever since. Christ I mean I really look for shit to call Harry out on, the prob is between him, Merrick, Quint and Beaks they all have 2 braincells between them and are fighting to see who wins, and it just gets tiring..man..it would be funny if it wasn't so fucking sad.
July 17, 2009, 2:09 p.m. CST
thanks this is my 5th user name btw. they usually are all supercowbell until i get banned.
July 17, 2009, 6:07 p.m. CST
Potter just makes up spells to fit the scenario he's in while LOTR set out to create a WORLD to explain the magic. Huge difference.
July 17, 2009, 6:32 p.m. CST
How in the hell did they ever go from Columbus to Alfonso to this made-for-tv knucklehead? The DH films are going to be very disappointing.
July 17, 2009, 6:37 p.m. CST
Really, the pacing of this movie killed the emotional connection for me. I was grateful at first for a director who likes to linger on the magical world of Harry Potter, instead of manically zipping along, but as it dragged on and on, I started to long for a little more editorial muscle. By the end...*SPOILER*... I really did not give a damn that Dumbledore had just died. Sure, I have read the book, and it's been awhile, but I remember it having a lot more emotional impact than, a shrug," Oh, so he's dead now. Is it over? " I'm a big sap and I would have at least like to fight back a few tears for the ol' codger. Really, it seems like it's been so long, I don't really know what is missing from the movie vs. the book. All I know is that it was a damn dull long movie.
July 17, 2009, 6:55 p.m. CST
When you read the books, you will feel all that is missing....and it will be amazing.
July 17, 2009, 6:59 p.m. CST
I enjoyed the hell out of it.
July 17, 2009, 7 p.m. CST
Gandalf makes the sun rise faster in the Hobbit and turns some trolls to stone. They ride giant eagles, there are dragons, and elves that live forever and speak telepathically. Saruman tosses people around with magic forces from his staff. The dark lord is a giant flaming eyeball. How the fuck is that more 'real world'? It's called 'fantasy' for a reason. You see what I did there, Locke? I cited examples to back up my argument.
July 17, 2009, 7:11 p.m. CST
if u dont u wont know whats going on i dont know if there is anyone else in the entire world who hasnt read them by now ...other than u harry
July 17, 2009, 7:39 p.m. CST
And I have to say what was there, was really well done. Had I not read the books I would have said this was an excellent movie. But I have read the books and I just don't understand why they cut as much as they did. I mean I can understand that you can't include everything but the end wasn't rushed exactly, it kinda rolled to a stop. And I can't see why they couldn't have had that sense of urgency that it had in the books. I mean I remember reading it with that kind of suspense you get in films like the Fugitive or Speed. But in this they just showed up at the tower, everyone kinda stood there, and then bip bap the deed was done. It had all the excitement of a group of people making a cup of tea.</p> <p>I went with my old Ma who hasn't read the books but has seen the movies. After every movie I make her tell me what happened to see if she got it. This time what I found interesting was that not only did she not completely get the idea of the horcrux, which I expected, but she didn't realize that the kid in the flashbacks was Voldemort. She thought it was the Half Blood Prince, and therefore young Snape. She didn't remember that Tom Riddle was Voldemort. So even though they said Tom Riddle 95 times she didn't remember who that was.</p> <p>My major problem is the mistreatment of Alan Rickman. He's a title character in this film and he's barely in it. It was unforgivable what they did to him in the last film completely taking out his backstory from this series. But come on, it's bad when at the end he's like "I'm the Half Blood Prince" and you're like "Okay. But why is that important again? Because you scribbled in a book?" I mean I know, but the movie made next to nothing of it. Another thing. The supporting characters didn't get enough time> Especially because with the amount of action that needs to happen in the next film I can't imagine they'll be getting much time then and then lots of them don't make it. They need a little glory before they go. </p> <p>What I loved. The actress playing Lavender Brown. She was hilarious. Draco Malfoy was great. He kept reminding me of a young Christopher Lee. I know the coloring is all wrong but still. He's so handsome too. Helena Bonham Carter. She's great, but part of me is sick of her and it's not fair. She's just ever-present. My mom even said "They throw her in everything." But I really liked how bad she was. I really can't find fault with Yates direction this time. It looked great. It just should have been 4 hours long.</p>
July 17, 2009, 7:56 p.m. CST
As you read his reviews you can obviously see Harry has issues understanding words in general. More than likely that is the reason he hasn't read the books yet. Also it could be the effort involved in lifting a book.....hell he doesn't even proof read his reviews.
July 17, 2009, 8:04 p.m. CST
Listening to the idiots in here call Rowling "extreme genius" and ubelievably equating HP with the great works of fantasy was getting really revolting. Thank you for the breath of fresh air. <br> <br> Oh, and Krang, you're an idiot.
July 17, 2009, 9:13 p.m. CST
He was the best damn thing in the whole movie and I forgot to mention him. He should be nominated.
July 17, 2009, 11:04 p.m. CST
I had the same problem with the adaption of the 3rd film (Don't worry Harry it's still my favorite one) when they completely blew off the explaination of who Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs were. I felt that was pretty important information...but I guess not important enough to add a 15 second explaination of it. Still loved the film...but too much left out.
July 17, 2009, 11:42 p.m. CST
you really need a girlfriend.
July 18, 2009, 1:05 a.m. CST
starring Bruce Vilanch
July 18, 2009, 1:10 a.m. CST
by Orbots Commander
Because I saw it earlier today and it wasn't good, at all. In fact it was *this* close to being awful. <p> It started off great with the bridge sequence then seemed to downshift into equal parts sitcom teenage romance and a Hardy Boys mystery----a really, really boring one. Some of the actors and subplots were interesting and kept us from walking out, but otherwise I thought this was one of the WORST Potters. What happened?? Since I didn't care for the previous Potter either, I think the problem is David Yates.
July 18, 2009, 1:41 a.m. CST
Then again, this review was scribbled by a guy who was impassioned by the likes of a GODZILLA remake and TWILIGHT. Jeffrey Lyons, comparatively, is the renascent Pauline Kael.
July 18, 2009, 2:07 a.m. CST
Saw this at www.NukeTheFridge.com!!! What is this??? Who's making this film? http://tinyurl.com/mys5d4
July 18, 2009, 4:24 a.m. CST
In answer to some replies. I wasn't claiming HBP was a bad movie because they changed the Quidditch robes again, I was simply using this as one example of things being changed in a series for no good reason other than a new director wanting to make his mark. On the other issue about Rowling not being original, neither were CS Lewis and JRR Tolkien. All their work was based on mythology and stories hundreds if not thousands of years old and they were inspired by earlier fantasy writers who are now mostly forgotten. My main complaint with Prince was where was the magic? Hogwarts has been turned into a dull, dark depressing castle. The ghosts, moving staircases and pictures have gone. Look at the Slug Club party, where are the House Elf waiters and fairy lights using real fairies? Look at the Weasley's shop, very little magic on display.
July 18, 2009, 5:48 a.m. CST
by Media Messiah
Save you money. I wanted to walk out on this movie--that's long it is, and boring!!! There are whole sequences that could have been cut out of the film, saving precious time, like all the tournament footage. Those sequences could have been cut down to a film montages, and saved 25 minutes in running time alone, as none of it helped to advance the story whatsoever, the tournament was there just for the sake of being there, having nothing to do with the rest of the story arc, it was all just filler???<BR><BR>The film is largely antiseptic emotionally, meaning that it's sterile. Other than a handful of soft laughs, that is it? Finally, the film ends like Empire Strikes Back and Back To The Future II...without an ending, it just stops. Save your money. Rent Stardust instead, it is a much more satisfying experience.
July 18, 2009, 7:51 a.m. CST
by Media Messiah
Save your money. I wanted to walk out on this movie--that's how long it is, and boring at that!!! There are whole sequences that could have been cut out of the film, saving precious time, like all the tournament footage. Those sequences could have been cut down to a film montages, and saved 25 minutes in running time alone, as none of it helped to advance the story whatsoever, the tournament was there just for the sake of being there, having nothing to do with the rest of the story arc, it was all just filler??? That is not good storytelling, good direction, or good editing. <BR><BR> The film is largely antiseptic emotionally, meaning that it's sterile. Other than a handful of soft laughs, oh and I forgot, Harmony...or whatever her name is, crying over her cheating boyfriend, and that is it? Finally, the film ends like Empire Strikes Back, and Back To The Future II...without an ending, it just stops. Save your money. Rent Stardust instead, it is a much more satisfying experience.
July 18, 2009, 9:11 a.m. CST
This is the most boring Harry Potter film yet. I thought it sucked dog. Agree with Harry on the third movie though. I can remember enjoying that one.
July 18, 2009, 9:44 a.m. CST
by Orbots Commander
...and comes to a theater near me, because, aside from an OK Star Trek, this Summer for movies has been pretty frickin' terrible, and Harry Potter 6 just made it worse. <p> I've had more fun staring at a wall than I had at the latest HP flick. My theater audience didn't much care for it either. Comments of 'dull as dirt' and 'Fuckin' Awful' heard while walking out after the movie. They were right.
July 18, 2009, 11:30 a.m. CST
I agree but I thought that was intentional (homage-like even) and that it totally made sense. They want you to have that feeling that we're headed into the final battle where good and evil will slug it out once and for all. Isn't that why we watch these things in the first place?
July 18, 2009, 1:08 p.m. CST
Saw it last night. Did anyone else notice the severe overuse of the word "brilliant"? I swear to God they must say something is "brilliant" at LEAST 13 times in this movie. I know it's a British thing but if you take a shot everytime someone says, "brilliant," you will not only be absolutely shit-faced by movie's end, you will probably die of alcohol poinoning. <br> <br> With that said, I thought it was an odd change from the book (SPOILER) that Dumbledore doesn't zap Harry with a paralysis spell and THAT'S what keeps Harry from intervening when Malfoy/Snape are killing Dumbledore. The way it plays out in the movie is dumb. Harry just hides and watches and doesn't do shit even tho when it's just Malfoy at first, whom he'd just kicked the living shit out of, is threatening to kill Dumbledore. And Harry doesn't react at all when Snape kills Dumbledore. In the book, Harry is a much more powerful wizard at this point, other than against Draco, in this movie, he appears to have made absolutely NO progress at all. And I agree with what an above poster said about why use the (Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe) Vanishing Cabinet to bring in the Death Eaters when you weren't going to have the climactic battle at the end? So basically, the Death Eaters only infiltrate Hogwarts to get Malfoy out after he kills Dumbledore and to destroy the dining hall and Hagrid's house in the movie? This is very watered down from the book where essentially the Death Eaters infiltrate to destroy Hogwarts and are beaten back in a great battle and the Death Eaters barely escape. I realize they are waiting for the last two movies to make Harry really become powerful but this should've had at least an EMPIRE STRIKES BACK feel to it, how Luke wasn't yet the Jedi he'd become in ROTJ but he was wayyy more bad ass than what he'd been in STAR WARS.
July 18, 2009, 4:48 p.m. CST
I actually agree with those points. But I still managed to enjoy the movie none the less. In my opinion, in general, if they truly want to satisfy fans of the book, and spectacle enthusiasts, then these movies need to be at least 3 and a half hours long. There will never be as much detail in the movies, as there is in the books with 2 hours and 30 mins. And then, people would complain that the movie is too long and boring. Can't please everyone though. But I agree that there are simple things that could have been done (such as dumbledore paralyzing harry), like better character emotion between harry/dumbledore, and harry/snape. Harry really hates snape, and really loved dumbledore, and that doesn't come across well at all in this movie.
July 18, 2009, 8:53 p.m. CST
July 18, 2009, 10:49 p.m. CST
The movie was fucking amazing! I loved it.
July 18, 2009, 10:56 p.m. CST
I'm sorry, but David Yates was and is the worst thing to happen to the Harry Potter franchise. This is a major motion picture franchise, and you can't have a director who has only done television talk on a franchise like this. He is suppose to be directing the last book. Maybe one day, an unabridged version of the films will be made.
July 18, 2009, 11:10 p.m. CST
Wow... I have no idea what people saw in this film to say they enjoyed it. Imagine the adventure and excitment of the first 3-4 films, take all that out and replace it with kissing teens then have lots of people talking about nonsense for well over two hours without anything happening. I have a hard time believing anyone truly enjoyed this and jsut want to like it so much they end up loving it. Total crud, I enjoy the potter movies but this one I will never watch again.
July 18, 2009, 11:58 p.m. CST
these books are such literary abortions that you read all of them? Or at least to the 6th book? How can you just ignore that Tolkien is guilty of the same sort of plagarism that you accuse jk of? I love Tolkien and have read the silmarillion ten or so times, enough to realize that he based many of his stories on classical and mythological tales. He even says so. I don't think her actual use of language is any thing to write home about but to call her a rip off artist is unfair.
July 19, 2009, 12:34 a.m. CST
I never said they were 'abortions.' You are overstating. I even said I liked them. I just don't believe that they are on the same level as Tolkien, Carrol, C.S. Lewis, etc. Others have made the same point that you have that Tolkien wasn't completely original either. Fine, point taken. No, Tolkien did not invent dragons. I get it. However, with that said I say that Tolkien did come up with his fair share of NEW creatures. I provided The Balrog as an example of this. The Wargs, the Fell Beasts, and the Orukai could be three more examples off the top of my head. The ONLY original beast I can think of from the HP series (which I have read all seven) is the snake man wizard Voldemort. Further, I pointed out that beyond his "bestiary," Tolkien also created entire new languages, now whether or not you want to believe they are just offshoots of Welsh as an above TB'er wrote, isn't the point really. The point is that there is nothing in Rowling's HP series that comes near that kind of depth. And lastly, I pointed out the poetry and the prose of Tolkien VASTLY outclasses the works of Rowling. The man was a wordsmith genius, there is nothing in all of the HP series as beautiful and as elegant as Theoden's "Where is the horse and the rider?" speech. And I am impressed that you have read the Silmarillion ten or so times. I've read it maybe twice but all the this elf tribe begat that elf tribe kinda glazes my eyes over after awhile. I loved the MorGoth/Ungoliant stuff tho. I would be more forgiving of Rowling's stuff if she reached a little harder with the imagination, the poetry and the prose, but even if you compare HP to say, THE HOBBIT which was written for the same age group, there really is no comparison. But hey, she made herself the richest woman in England and she got a lot of kids excited about reading who may not have been otherwise and in those respects I call her an "extreme genius" but as for being on Tolkien's level? Let's be real.
July 19, 2009, 1:21 a.m. CST
i liked it!
July 19, 2009, 2:02 a.m. CST
I had hope (foolish me) this time in Yates. Of all the great review I heard this time out about pacing and such, I didn't expect the bore factor of the previous film. And now he'll be directing the last two also??? I give up on this film franchise. Man, I dozed off maybe 4 times during this movie, NOTHING happened. Only decent part was the cave scene. By the way, Goblet of Fire was my favorite of the films.
July 19, 2009, 2:10 a.m. CST
because YATES BLOWS. Count me out for that last two. Not gonna sucker my cash a third time.
July 19, 2009, 2:42 a.m. CST
...of the movie was when Harry tuned in some Bing Crosby on his XM radio. Oh, wait.
July 19, 2009, 2:56 a.m. CST
Harry and the kids are in class. Some mystery happens. Some evil teacher is on the run. Fight scene. Quidditch match between rival kids and Harry. Harry befriends rival kids. Fight bad guy. End.
July 19, 2009, 6:13 a.m. CST
First of all, Comic Con is at the end of THIS week, so please get a grip. Second, the IRON MAN photos and JENNIFER'S BODY trailer were posted and discussed. Third, what's with your hard-on for JENNIFER'S BODY anyway? (that's a joke). If you think this site is so awful and behind the times, then leave. Please, nobody will notice or care you're gone.
July 19, 2009, 10:44 a.m. CST
Difficult pacing for the first hour, really off, to be honest. The Half Blood Prince plays a VERY minor role, but the last act is very neat, and the black chick Harry gets a hard on for at the start is perfect.
July 19, 2009, 10:46 a.m. CST
It's chock full of so many great parts - the massive Quidditch match, Weasley's Tent Mansion, The Death Eaters attacking the camp, The French bitches, (oops I mean French Witches), the Goblet of Fire tournament, the entire Voldemort regains his corporeal form scene (which is THE BEST scene in the entire HP series so far )- with Pettigrew killing Edward Cullen (Pattinson, ha), Pettigrew cutting his own arm off (and getting the silver one), Harry getting bled, Ralph Fiennes, perfectly cast, gives his incredible debut as he fully realizes the physicality of Voldemort chasitizing the Death Eaters (where we discover Luscious Malfoy is what we suspected), the first wizared battle between Harry and Voldemort, and Harry's narrow escape WITH the Pattinson's body to which his Father's reaction to seeing his dead son ("My boyyyyy!") has been THE most emotionally heart wrenching scene of ALL the Potter movies. GOBLET OF FIRE, retained all the magic, fantasy, and adventure we've come to love the Potter series for AND it had genuine scary and sad moments. Comparatively speaking, HALF BLOOD PRINCE is EPIC FAIL.
July 19, 2009, 10:47 a.m. CST
July 19, 2009, 10:49 a.m. CST
It looks great! The cinematography is awesome! Yates has a better visual eye! The actors are great! <p> And that's it. No one really seems that interested in the story of teen wizards and witches snogging. Bleh. I'm so disappointed in these reviews so far. I still haven't seen the movie bc I'm protesting. I don't want Yates to have a great opening week with my money, so I'm waiting a bit. <p>
July 19, 2009, 10:55 a.m. CST
Its sad that the most emotional part of the series so far, and the MOST emotional we've ever seen Harry Potter, is at the death of Cedric Diggory. <p>Not with Sirius, not with Dumbledore, but with Cedric. Kind of says a lot about the director, doesn't it?<p> I'm still annoyed that at the end of Order of the Phoenix, Harry wasn't extremely pissed off in Dumbledore's office, railing against the old wizard and destroying all his things while Dumbledore silently watched before admitting that he blames himself for Sirius' death.<p> Instead, Harry just sat there quietly like "Yeah, he's dead. Whatever." Bullsheet.
July 19, 2009, 11 a.m. CST
I think the Thestrals were an original creation. I can't find any evidence of a creature that Rowling took and twisted for her own benefit to create those cool, skeletal horse things. Maybe dragons come closest, or the idea of the skeletal horse that Death rides with the other Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Its a cool idea, to be sure. <p> Also, the Dementors are original, as far as I can discover too. And if you say they are just a riff on the grim reaper, then I would say the Balrog is just a riff on a demon. <p> I agree, Tolkien is the better writer though; I'm not trying to dispute you on that. And I love The Silmarillion. I think its a much more epic story than the War of the Ring.
July 19, 2009, 11:16 a.m. CST
I don't know how they are making so much money... It's incredible how dumb people are...
July 19, 2009, 11:22 a.m. CST
You kinda answered your own question, with the Thestrals being akin to the skeletal horse that Death of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse rides. And the Dementors are not only similar to the Grim Reaper, which I guess is the original, but they're sort of 3rd generation rips of the Grim Reaper, after Dickens' Ghost of Christmas Future and Tolkien's Ringwraiths. So I grant that it wasn't an original image even when Dickens and Tolkien used it but a fourth go around for the iconic horror? As for Balrog being "just a riff on a demon," that's hard to say because if you just look at Bosch's Hell in his Garden of Earthly Delights tryptich, you'll see that in that painting alone, demons can come in a gazillion different forms whereas skeletal horse and Grim Reaper clones are pretty specific. <br> <br> And yeah, you can't count me in the small but growing dissenters who is beginning to believe that Yates was the wrong guy for the job and is sinking the franchise creatively and has me worried about the final two movies. I own all of the HP movies on dvd (and have watched them repeatedly) but I don't have the last one and I doubt I have no desire to see this one again either. Kinda says something there, too.
July 19, 2009, 11:22 a.m. CST
Man, it's so sad Yates is directing the final installments. How exciting it would've been to hear they brought back Columbus or Cuaron! I think Yates set the mood too shitty with the last two anyways, this series is ruined for me. I will stick to the first four and that's it I guess.
July 19, 2009, 11:45 a.m. CST
Truncated, poorly edited, and confusing character motivations. Ron's sudden jealousy of Harry comes out of left field with no build up whatsoever. I hate the cinematography. Scenes that are supposed to tug at your heart end up being hilarious ("MY BOOOYYYYEEEEE!!!!"). Terrible.
July 19, 2009, 11:45 a.m. CST
Did you mean, we *can* count you in the group of dissenters?
July 19, 2009, 11:47 a.m. CST
I think the reaction of Cedric's dad to his boy's death is spot on and completely believable. Also, the music playing during that scene is one of the best tracks on the album, the other being "Harry in Winter".
July 19, 2009, 11:50 a.m. CST
I will agree that Nicolas Hooper's music in the last two films is bland. And he thinks he's too good to use Williams' themes more than once or twice? What an asshole.
July 19, 2009, 12:07 p.m. CST
by Orbots Commander
Yeah, me too. After the last two Harry Potter movies, I'm done with this film series---at least going to the movies and watching them. <p> I discovered the first three films on cable and DVD and I'll leave the rest of the series to that as well.
July 19, 2009, 1:39 p.m. CST
D.Vader- oops. you got me there. Yes you "can" count me in. <br><br> Mattman, I completely disagree with you regarding the "My Boyyyy" moment at the end of GOBLET OF FIRE. Maybe it's because I have a son myself, but that particular moment stuck a HUGE emotional chord with me. Like D.Vader said, it was pitch perfect and spot on. I defy you to name a more emotionally heart wrenching scene in all of the HP movies. And even so, even if you weren't so moved by it as D.Vader and myself were, I don't know how on Earth you could find that moment "hilarious." A Father son sees his pride and joy teenage dead before him and plaintively yells to him and you find that funny? What would do you expect him to do? The only other think I can think of is to perhaps yell his name instead but as a parent, I can tell you that his reaction his VERY realistic and not funny at all. In fact, I remember seeing GOBLET OF FIRE in the theatres twice and not only did I NOT here anyone busting a gut in unbridled 'hilarity,' I'd go as far as saying that I don't think there was a single peep from the capacity crowd and nary a dry eye in the house. As for Ron's jealousy, yeah, well, I'll take that over the Hogwarts 90210 feel Yates gave HALF BLOOD PRINCE. But perhaps Yates' style seems more in keeping with your rather cold take on how highly emotional moments should be filmed b/c if you found GOF too over the top, Yates is so understated, Dumbledore dies in HBP and you find yourself going, "meh." <br> <br> Btw, notice with all the snogging going on there's absolutely no mention of the Harry's Asian girl sweetheart that they worked so hard to establish in the previous movies?
July 19, 2009, 1:53 p.m. CST
I like the fact that you sensed the film as I probably will Harry. I have cherry picked my reading of the books and started from book 4 to the end, my favourite being Half blood prince, so im kind of dreading this movie now lol. I was lucky enough to go to the set when they completed film 3 Azkaban and after being overwhelmed with the detail on its construction my attitude towards this movie series is biased to the positive. I would recommend that anyone should see the "world" that they create..massive sets..very real and the stone they use for the walls is as cold as a real castle. I hope the movie is a good one
July 19, 2009, 2:09 p.m. CST
Don't try to give me a guilt trip about finding that moment funny, when your name pokes fun at a dead young actor. The moment didn't work for me, and that's all there is to it. It felt forced and unintentionally hilarious to me. And by the way, it didn't REALLY happen so I can find it funny if I damn well want to. You, on the other hand, are making fun of someone who died in real life.
July 19, 2009, 2:21 p.m. CST
It's cool the movie worked for you. It's just the only Potter that didn't work for me, personally.
July 19, 2009, 2:38 p.m. CST
Who is guilt tripping you? I wish people would stop reading between the lines and adding their own strawman arguments when debating around here. I will defend the actual words I used and those only. I never said for one second that you should feel "guilty." I only stated I couldn't fathom how you could find it so to the extreme of the other side. If it doesn't move you, fine, but it was "hilarious?" Dumbledore's death didn't move me in the least in HBP but I didn't find it "hilarious." And I pointed out that in the two packed capacity theatres I remember seeing GOBLET OF FIRE in, not only did I NOT hear any laughter at that moment but there were people actually crying. You are certainly allowed to have whatever emotional response comes naturally to you, it's just for D.Vader and myself, we found it emotionally affecting in a sad way and you somehow saw "hilarity" in it. Is that akin to my screenname? That's a stretch. But ok, maybe. But this isn't about either of US. You're taking it too personal, D.Vader and I were agreeing on the fact that we found that moment to be the most emotionally effective death of all the HP series and YOU disagreed with us and we disagreed back. Nothing personal. This debate is about a specific moment in that specific movie, not whether of not either of us are emotionally stunted sociopaths b/c of your reaction to it and my screenname. And I'm still waiting to hear you provide an example of an emotionally affecting in all the HP series.
July 19, 2009, 2:41 p.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
& v articulate hate too. Well, if you see it and hate it there's no amount of talking you into liking it. And I DO understand the quibbles. The 'Half-Blood-Pince' storyline is only JUST there, and you feel that they might have left it out had it not been, er, the title. And, another example, what happened to Cho? BUT, those quibbles aside, I really thought this was a brilliant episode, I think it's edged past GOBLET OF FIRE to become my second favourite (after PRISONER OF AZKABAN, which will probably not be bettered). I thought the laughs were genuine, and the menace was genuine, and rather than dissipate each other they co-existed, which is something you REALLY don't see much. The visuals go beyond it looking pretty. The whole world felt, to me, somehow more real. I can't explain how, but I think it's down to many careful choices in terms of the directing, camerawork, editing etc. The MUSIC did its job in making this feel like a REAL world. It felt like a world in which John Williams tunes would no longer be appropriate. Indeed, if Williams had been scoring this, he might have taken the approach he took with Minority Report and War of the Worlds (for example) - i.e no easily identifiable tunes. And the whole thing felt epic, for the first time. I felt that Hogwarts really does exist - for the first time. I CAN'T WAIT for the next one. CAN'T WAIT.
July 19, 2009, 3:05 p.m. CST
For those of us who haven't seen it yet, it's worth seeing then? See, I have a theory I've been working on for some time now. Basically, for every seemingly level-headed person who comes here and says about a given film "I enjoyed it, it works", you multipy that by the legion of spazzdicks who tax their cerebral capacity coming up with witty metaphors for how much said movie was substandard. It's been reliable so far.
July 19, 2009, 3:14 p.m. CST
That Goblet of Fire worked the least for you. I think it worked the least for the critics too. Which one worked best for you? I'm going to assume POA, since that's the generally accepted Best of the series. <p> I think Cedric's death was handled well. I can see (a little bit) how someone might find the moment with his dad cheesy, bc of the way he wails, but I imagine during real scenes of such drama, the anguish cries of a parent seeing their dead child would sound unnatural. <p> But that's just me. I respect your opinion too, and its not like we could convince the other that they're wrong in a situation like this. "So, that's that. And no harm done =)."* <p>* Bonus if anyone gets that quote; it is related to the topic.
July 19, 2009, 3:22 p.m. CST
Another reason why I find it very believable is because of my father. He and I were watching it on tv one day, and he's not a big fantasy fan, and I don't think he's seen any of the Harry Potters- he had no reason to. <p> I was watching it and I think he joined in just because he wanted to spend some time with me (growing up we watched a lot of movies together), and maybe he was intrigued by the drama that was unfolding onscreen. But after Harry brought Cedric's body back to the tournament and his dad starts mourning over his body, wailing in front of all the students who can do nothing but watch, I got the sense that it was affecting my dad. <p>I didn't dare try to steal a glance at him to see if he was visibly moved or not, but it just felt like there was a change in the air, a palpable feeling of empathy and sadness that had swept into the room with that scene. <p> And because of that (along with other reasons), I will always feel that scene rings true. If my dad, being a father of course, and one not likely to show emotions, would find that a very sad scene, one that moves him emotionally, then I think its authentic.
July 19, 2009, 3:24 p.m. CST
Not even a stolen glance her way? Or a scene of her snogging someone else, showing how she's moved on? <p> Terrible. Especially considering how they made a big deal about building her up, and there was no real "breakup" scene in Order of the Phoenix. Pfft. Lame.
July 19, 2009, 3:46 p.m. CST
Unless, I somehow missed her, nope, she's not it in it at all. No explanation, nothing. It's all set up to establish Hermione and Ron (which after 5 previous movies with no prior hint at an attraction between the two of them at all) seems out of nowhere, same with Harry and Ginny all of a sudden.
July 19, 2009, 4:02 p.m. CST
by Jack Burton
This is the 2nd best movie of the series behind Prisoner of Azkaban. I highly enjoyed it but this is easily the loosest adaptation of the series so if you are a die hard Potter fan that has read the series numerous times you may be disappointed. Same if you are a casual fan because it doesn't fill in all the gaps or catch anyone up either and can be very confusing if you have only seen the proceeding movies once, or read none of the books. I would have liked more with Tom Riddle and the last battle but for a 2.5 hour movie the time flew by and I was entertained through its entirety. To each his own.
July 19, 2009, 4:08 p.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
They have been setting it up a bit. She grasped his hand in PRISONER OF A when they went out to see the Hippogriff. And in GOBLET it was clear she really wanted Ron to ask her to the ball, and he in turn was miffed to see her with Krum and told her she was fraternising with the enemy. It was fairly clear from then that they were headed for each other. There wasn't much romance in PHOENIX. (Also, GInny had a big crush on Harry in CHAMBER, remember when she comes down to breakfast and goes all quiet and boggle-eyed.) ANYWAYS, there's plenty of wierd continuity in there too and I agree that the vanishing of Cho is a little ungentlemanly.
July 19, 2009, 4:09 p.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
There wasn't much Ron/Hermione romance in Phoenix. ... Unless anyone can remember any. Oh god I'm turning into a goblin. Night all.
July 19, 2009, 4:29 p.m. CST
You are right, I stand corrected, there has indeed been some set up. I guess what I was referring to was the way it went from about first gear in all the instances you describe to about third or fourth gear in this movie. What was only hinted at in the instances you describe are now full on L.O.V.E.
July 19, 2009, 4:31 p.m. CST
And there was a very lovely shot of Emma's budding cleavage (or puffies, if I understand that term correctly). Dumbledore's death was saddening, I hope he is resurrected in the next one.
July 19, 2009, 4:35 p.m. CST
There was a Hairy Asian Girl in the HP Movies? I keed, I keed!<P>I wondered about that too! I kept wondering when she (Cho Chang) was going to show up!!!
July 19, 2009, 4:40 p.m. CST
I love how you get a contingent that swears the Potter books are straight kidlit, yet another points out all the details missing from the movies.
July 19, 2009, 4:50 p.m. CST
Dude, do you have a point to make about either the books or the movies or are you just here to smear shit on the walls?
July 19, 2009, 5:03 p.m. CST
You just can't. I'm not even going to argue about it, and I don't think most rational people would disagree with it, either. I suppose, the only exception to the rule might be something like 300 where you didn't really have a complex story to begin with. Even 30 Days of Night, I guess could fall into this category, thought I only read the graphic novel - didn't see the movie. <p> But, that brings me to my next thought, which is that I think there's a graphic novel market for HP. <p> I read recently that they are doing graphic novel interpretations of all the Twilight books and it occurred to me that this is another way to make money "re-selling" the HP series. I graphic novel adaptation still would probably cut out parts from the books, but they could also be drawn to include alot more of the minute details that the movies don't capture. I'm thinking something like Watchmen, but in reverse.
July 19, 2009, 5:09 p.m. CST
I take it you haven't read the books?
July 19, 2009, 6 p.m. CST
Yeah, skippy, my point is we got pseudo-intellectuals who denounce the books as too simplistic, then I'd swear the same folk mention all the complex plot points missing from the adaptation's narrative. It all sounds a bit hypocritical. If one feels the books ain't all that, why would they care whether the movie got it right or not? Wasn't aware I was being too vague.
July 19, 2009, 6:06 p.m. CST
This is the crowd that can't follow Transformers cause it has, "too much action".
July 19, 2009, 6:10 p.m. CST
C'mon, ZombieHeath, I thought we was cool. Sorry I disturbed yer profound discourse with my random observations. Pray continue.
July 19, 2009, 6:12 p.m. CST
I'm Outty 5000. These cats are wwwaaaaayyy too cerebral for me.
July 19, 2009, 6:13 p.m. CST
'Coz just complaining, not once, not twice but four times now about the TB itself in no way contributes to the discussion about the books nor the movies there, er, "Skippy."
July 19, 2009, 6:53 p.m. CST
If I get what you're saying here, you're accusing me of being off-topic. Holy shit. My "complaints" were ABOUT what was being said in regards to the books and movies. Excuse my irrelevance, William F. Buckley. Is it just me, or you always spoiling for a fight? All the idiocy that flies around here and you're zeroing in on my "shit"? Getthefuckouttahere!
July 19, 2009, 7:06 p.m. CST
Y'know, I've encountered your type befor, ZombieHeath. They think they're holding court in some half-ass internet parlor-room where folks hang on their every word. Chill. Frankie say relax. I'm not trying to steal your spotlight. I was just stating my opinion, same as you.
July 19, 2009, 7:15 p.m. CST
The rest of us are discussing the elements of the books and the movies and their translations from books to movies. We may disagree but we are exchanging ideas. It's not that you are being "off-topic," God knows talkbacks go off on tangents and get de-railed all the time. No,but you aren't even doing that. You are just critiquing those actually having a discussion. You have spent four posts today alone commenting on the commentators rather than making points having anything to do with HP, thus bringing the conversation to a self-conscious halt in an insulting, holier-than-thou manner, and in short, "smearing shit ont he walls." And newbie, save your dimestore psychology. Do you have something to add to the HP discussion besides your condescending, "There's some people in here who are total dicks," attitude or not?
July 19, 2009, 7:27 p.m. CST
Dismissing the books - which you haven't read - as "juvenile pop fiction" and praising the movies, as if they added the forboding, dark tone, instead of lifting it from the books. Reading this review actually makes me angry, because it is so full of Dumb. Read the books, for the love of God, Harry. They will make the movies more enjoyable, and help you avoid such massive FAIL.
July 19, 2009, 7:39 p.m. CST
Priceless. I'm flattered you haven't applied your favorite chestnut, "strawman argument" to me yet. I must be doing something right. Thank you for making your point, in your roundabout way. Heath, it was never my intention to interupt anyone's flow of ideas. For that, I apologize. You'll have to forgive my ignorant ramblings on a lazy Sunday. You are quick to point a finger (but there's three pointin' back atcha). I'm not holier-than-anything. You are barking up the wrong tree. If that's the impresssion I made, my faux pas in phrasing. Newbie? That's cute! Perish the thought! Although I'm sure getting to know you is a delightful experience, I would never presume to know your mind. Just based on what I've observed you seem to get agitated and go off half-cocked on anyone who doesn't share your point of view. Look, I'm trying to be a sport here and let you know nothing I said was ever directed at you personally. I was just doin' what people do here. That it wasn't phrased well enough is a failure on my part. I guess, for your purposes, I have nothing to add. Can I ask though, who are you to tell other people what they can post? Don't really care, just curious.
July 19, 2009, 8:24 p.m. CST
by Six Demon Bag
yeah that Cedric scene rings true with me too. his dad just being crushed gets to you. really well done.
July 19, 2009, 9:41 p.m. CST
...I needed to know about you is that you have a son and are still hear spending HOURS talking shit out your pie hole that you know nothing about. You argue for no reason and ignore anyone who makes a real point. Go spend some time with your child you fucking loser.
July 19, 2009, 9:45 p.m. CST
I saw it this afternoon. And it's got some incredible effects, and it's beautifully photographed, and I love Alan Rickman to death, and Jim Broadbent was EXCELLENT, but GOD WHAT A FREAKING WORTHLESS BORE OF A FILM!!! Hermione is all WEEPY, JESUS! Over RON!!! And Harry is thinking about ol' what's-her-name, sounds like a cute name for booze OH YEAH "GINNY", and why the HELL should anyone CARE??? God DAMN I nearly fell asleep! And when the film was over, NO applause from the audience, a lot of muttering, people were scrambling to get out of there, DEPRESSING AS HELL. Thank god for Nickelodeon's Spongebob marathon tonight - usually I avoid that cartoon but DAMN I needed cheering up! SHEEE--IITT!!!! Nothing could EVER entice me to watch that celluloid snorefest again. Jeez, I expected to get plenty sick of Potter before the films ended but after this I never want to see his damn scar and his cute little unicornhair wand again! Fie upon the whole series! That is all.
July 19, 2009, 9:55 p.m. CST
I did a fine job of making my point, and I've done it on more HP talkbacks than I can count. More often than not a majority of rational, level-headed talkbackers have agreed with me. ZHL goes out of his way to be an insulting dick stain for no reason. "It" attacked me for no reason when "it" assumed that I had addressed a comment at "it". I simply gave the delusional pussy fart a taste of "it's" own medicine. Beyond that, everything "it" has said is subjective opinion. There is no fact or proof in anything "it" has said. As soon as "it" pulls "it's" head out of "it's" ass long enough to stop eating "it's" own bullshit "it" may actually understand this point. Really, why is "it" (subhuman, so it does not get a sex classification) hear going on and on and on arguing with everyone? The books are second in sales to the bible. The movie franchise is the most popular ever. Does "it" really think everyone is just going to bow down and say, "Oh geez, you're totally right! How could so many millions of us been so terribly wrong?" The shit that enema bag has said in this talkback alone is absolutely ridiculous! THL, go outside! Breath some fresh air. AND PLAY WITH YOU CHILD!!!! I have no children and I have been gone from this site for several days because I have a fucking life! If I had a child I would have NO TIME TO BE HERE, EVER!
July 19, 2009, 10:16 p.m. CST
Yeah, I knew as soon as I mentioned I have son, one of you fucking mentally unbalanced shit eaters would bring him up to use in a flame. Get some fucking class you worthless piece of shit. And for your information, my child is an infant which means that while he sleeps most of the day and I work on a computer at my office, you know, where I WORK (you should come out of the basement and try your hand at an actual job besides the BLOWjob you give your retarded neighbor). And of course, you have no children, because you would have to actually have to be involved with a GIRL to get one and we all know that you'll never reach the right hygiene levels to achieve that particular goal. Amirite? As to your point "so many MILLIONS of us." Delusions of grandeur much, fuctard? Yeah, there's MILLIONS of people who put Rowling on the same level as Tolkien? Biitcchhhh, pleeease. Pull your head out of your ass, go drain your colostomy bag and remember to break your Prozac in half. How's that for 'subjective,' you idiot.
July 19, 2009, 10:51 p.m. CST
is 100 times more entertaining than this movie.
July 20, 2009, 12:02 a.m. CST
The mirror scene in the first movie, when Harry sees his parents.
July 20, 2009, 1:41 a.m. CST
Do you use spell check? Do you run any of your fucking drivel by someone that knows grammar, spelling, and English usage? Fuck man, give it up and let someone who can at least PASS as educated do a review!
July 20, 2009, 1:46 a.m. CST
As KERMIT THE FROG used to say...<P>"It ain't easy bein' GREEN"!
July 20, 2009, 1:47 a.m. CST
July 20, 2009, 1:48 a.m. CST
July 20, 2009, 1:48 a.m. CST
July 20, 2009, 1:51 a.m. CST
July 20, 2009, 2:37 a.m. CST
Hey, I learned my lesson. Never disturb some scholarly gentlemen with your inane viewpoint while they're talkin' about some HP! And for those keeping score, ZHL, like many of us, has offspring. Hopefully, this dispels the fallacy of us all being sexually frustrated virgins. Seriously though, you got off easy, ZombieHeath. A while back, I used to post under a different i.d., and I disclosed that I had children. This one s.o.b. said some things about my family that were most unkind.
July 20, 2009, 3:35 a.m. CST
I don't understand the virulent talk back on here. Harry's just giving his opinion not, killing your child. So to Harry, here's a little encouragement. Thanks for what you do. Your opinion and insight are valued. Anyway, to the movie at hand. I loved it, like I loved all of them. I will say I came into it a little nervous, because I wasn't sure what Yates was going to do with it. The the magic and wonder isn't as potent in his films as it was it the first four, but I do think he struck a perfect emotional core in this film. I loved the pacing and build up to what was essential a to be continued ending. I also loved the opening scene, which I don't believe was in the book. It was small, but beautiful. It was a simple flirtation for Harry to leave the craziness of his world and rejoin the muggle world. A flirtation which Harry will never of course take. Good job, David Yates and Steve Kloves. I enjoyed it.
July 20, 2009, 6:29 a.m. CST
Having now seen the film – This is a pretty decent review, the only real problem with it is that you skirt round “the issue” – you would have been far better off slapping a gargantuan spoiler warning on it and discussing the meat of the film openly. <p> Oh, and your description of Malfoy is spot on, he's almost the highlight of the film. <p> For fuck sake H, read this book before you see the next movie because the film is a neutered version and it’s madness to go into the finale without having the full scope of who these people are. Consider the book the "directors cut"
July 20, 2009, 2:15 p.m. CST
Harry Potter is porn for LARPERs.
July 20, 2009, 2:56 p.m. CST
Too long; too much dead air; Order of the Phoenix was much more thrilling; script could've been handled better, but that's my opinion, inspiration, and impression; music is a waste -- where the F is JW !?
July 20, 2009, 3:27 p.m. CST
I can't tell you how many times I checked my watch to see how far we were from the end. The movie was far too long, with too much of what felt like filler. I nearly fell asleep, and got sick of the teen love drama the moment the first kiss was planted. The "surprise" ending wasn't a surprise at all and the acting throughout that whole scene did not in any way, shape, or form reflect the gravity of the situation (EXCEPT for Malfoy). These movies have become one big parody of themselves... everything is formulaic. Every single movie happens this way: 1) School begins, 2) Bad things start happening, 3) Dumbledore tells Harry he has to ask too much of him, 4) Harry suspects Snape, 5) Harry suspects Malfoy, 6) Harry defeats the baddie, 7) Snape is cleared of all wrong-doing, and 8) School ends. Yes, I am aware Half-Blood Prince doesn't include #7, but the way the movie ended it's obvious that there is more story to be told, so it wouldn't shock me at all if suddenly Snape was revealed to be a double-agent, involved in Dumbledore's plan all along.
July 21, 2009, 7:54 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
It was a brilliant movie. Yates and co. did some really unusual things: they reinvigorated the world; they made it genuinely funny and genuinely menacing; they kept me in love with the main characters. And, although it WAS long, I can't wait to see it again. To me it felt 'chunky long' rather than 'boring long'. (I am still talking about the film, by the way, re-reading that last sentence you'd be forgiven for thinking that the subject matter was now 'dicks'.) The series really is growing up with every year - with each film I feel that the characters (& by extension the viewers) are more aware and more conscious of themselves and the world around them.
July 21, 2009, 2:04 p.m. CST
This film, in my mind is a disaster. It isn't bad in the same way Transformers 2 was, with ridiculous plot, dialogue, and impluasibilities. No, this film is bad because everything most people lved about the first,3-4 Potter films is missing in action. Remember all those magical moments of discovery in the previous films? remember the lush beautiful environments? remember the constant moving plots of mystery and suspense? All COMPLETELY gone. It is, however replaced with beverly hills 90210 bullshit that should of been a minor subplot and ends up taking the majority of the film it seemed. Really, when it came down to it I enjoyed the first part of the movie believing it was building to something but it never took off. They even through in an action scene not found in the book just to try and make audiences happy, however it is transparent as it has no bearing on the plot at all. Is it a more mature film? Yes it is, but that's not meaning a better film. Everything was completely unsatysifying, I have yet to believe people really enjoyed this. Does not compute.
July 21, 2009, 3:22 p.m. CST
I have just seen this movie and whilst it had some good moments, it was ultimately boring and tiring to watch.
July 21, 2009, 3:35 p.m. CST
i read all the harry potter books as they came out, and liked them. i thought the movies have been pretty good so far. i saw the new one today and it might be my least favorite. it was still good like the others, but so much of this movie was about young peoples relationships, which i dont care about at all. and the main adventure for the first 2 thirds of the movie or something is getting some memory from an old guy, not that exciting. another thing, that might not matter to people who dont read the books, but slughorn. i've forgotten about what happens in the books mostly, but i remember slughorn sticking out as this big guy with a walrus mustache and a larger than life personality. in the movie his character is little more than just an old guy. i think they've done great with all the characters so far but slughorn was a big let down. my favorite part of this movie is the same as my favorite of the last movie...hermione and luna lovegood. so, so hot. hermione is crazy hot. and luna is too but i also love her personality in the movie. i wouldn't recommend this movie unless you're a big fan of the others or the books, for me the best parts were looking at those hot young girls.
July 21, 2009, 3:35 p.m. CST
i agree that the third one is the best book and movie. the first time i read it i was really into all the twists and magic.
July 21, 2009, 5:40 p.m. CST
of course Slughorn isn't like the books. In the books he was exciting and fantasical with lots of life. Yates believes those elements have no business in a Harry Potter film.
July 22, 2009, 1:57 a.m. CST
Here's the first rule I enforce after I have been "mugged" out of my dollars with the first film in the franchise. When I saw the first Harry Potter film directed by Chris Columbus, it's awful, smaltzy and leaden. Even Terry Gilliam hated Columbus' version of Harry Potter, calling it "pedestrian". Hated Harry Potter so much I refused to see Chamber of Secrets and still have not seen it to this day except for brief bits seen on movie broadcast on tv. Since the directors changed, I liked POA by Alfonso Cauron and sort of liked GOF by Mike Newell. But then I saw OotP by David Yates on DVD and it's easily the worst HP movie since the first. I read the negative reviews noting problematic pacing and leaden directing by David Yates. So, I will NOT watch anymore HP movies directed by Yates because he's going to RUIN and DESTROY the book-to-movie adaptation franchise. <p> Chant with me: DAVID YATES IS A HACK. DAVID YATES IS A HACK. DAVID YATES IS A HACK. DAVID YATES IS A HACK. DAVID YATES IS A HACK. DAVID YATES IS A HACK. DAVID YATES IS A HACK. DAVID YATES IS A HACK.
July 22, 2009, 4:11 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
Hellooo! So, this is interesting because it seems that some people (like me) think this is maybe the second BEST Potter film (after Prisoner of Azkaban, which is SO enchanting, and will probably not be bettered); while others (such as yourselves) think this is maybe one of the WORST. I don't know what JK Rowling things, but I did see her interviewed when she was doing publicity for the last book, and she said that she thought that Order of the Phoenix was the BEST one yet. [Con'td]
July 22, 2009, 4:19 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
While I'm not going to contest the fact that you didn't enjoy Half-Blood Prince, you can't contest the fact that I DID enjoy it. What seems to be the case it that David Yates is making some choices that some people like and others hate. It seems to me that Yates is all about Harry, Ron and Hermione's experiences of growing up. Just as, when one grows up in real life, the world becomes bigger, less safe, and less enchanted, so the world in the HP movies is doing the same. There IS lots of magic still - but it's all for a reason, it's much less of a confection. (Apart from the Weasley twins stuff?) And we are MUCH more conscious of the muggle world, and that the wizard events are happening in a larger context - which is why the bridge destruction and the destruction of the Weasley's house worked for me.
July 22, 2009, 4:24 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
...so, as it does in life, the world in these films is becoming progressively more 'real'. How Yates does this but still manages to have such incredible images in his films - the train moving through the snow, the corn blowing in the wind, the waves against the cliff - is quite some balancing act. And I think he's doing an amazing balancing act in making the world full of menace - I really felt that something horrible could happen any minute - but also so genuinely funny (there was so much laughter when I saw it in a full cinema). So, to conclude, I totally see that you don't like what Yates is doing, and I'm sorry you're not enjoying his films. But you really can't accuse him of being a hack, because hacks are people who don't care enough about what they are doing to make any choices whatsoever.
July 22, 2009, 7:38 a.m. CST
I never accused yates ofbeing a hack but I will say he is a talented director with a vision I dislike. It's all good and dandy to make it more realistic and bound to this world, but for me, Harry Potter is about adventure, fantasy and discovery. I credit yates for wanting to get more into the characters but with over 2 and a half hours he had plenty of time to do that and still be exciting. Everyone has their own tastes but I hate the direction these movies have taken and to me, I'm already depressed over the soon to be poop movies in the Potter Franchise. By the way, take what Rowling says about the films with a grain of salt, she has vested interests and with each suceeding one she said it was the best yet. wait until a year after the final blu-ray for the final film is out and you might get an honest answer. This is akin to Harrison Ford telling everyone Kingdom of the Crystal skull was the best Indy yet...
July 22, 2009, 9:20 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
& I do see what you mean re JK. (This must be a very strange time for her, no - with the Potter bandwagon still going but her not actually writing any books.) It sounds as if the films are heading in a direction that I will enjoy and you won't. I'm sorry you won't, but we can probably agree that it's better for these films to have a vision rather than someone just dedicated to slavish adaptation, which would undoubtedly end in something a bit 'meh'. Although - and this is the hard pill Yates will have to swallow - however good his films are they will never be as beloved as Prisoner of Azkaban.
July 22, 2009, 12:32 p.m. CST
For every Potter movie there is always going to be someone who thought the changes made for film failed. This time around it's my turn. So you'll know where I'm coming from, as far as the films go I loved 1, 2 and 3; I liked Goblet a little less; I didn't like Order of the Phoenix. And I suppose I enjoyed this film, in the sense that I laughed several times at the jokes and I was interested all the way through, but there were too many things that fell flat, were unexplained, or were shoe-horned in. The ending was awful - having Harry hiding in Dumbledore's office rather than paralyzed means that Harry basically watches Snape kill Dumbledore and then gives him a head start leaving the school, which made no sense and was really foreign to the character. Having Snape declare "I am the half-blood Prince!" even though the entire mystery surrounding who the Prince was has been excised from the film was a real groaner. But the real problem is that the Michael Gambon depiction of Dumbledore has always been so damned emotionally distant and affectless that it's impossible to buy his relationship with Harry for a second, and this means that the entire emotional dynamic of the film is meaningless. If Richard Harris had lived longer this probably would not have been such a huge problem, but with Gambon you never, ever come to see Dumbledore as a surrogate parent for Harry [he's just kind of this guy who does exposition instead] and you also never come to see Dumbledore as the "hero's mentor" who has to die for the hero to go on alone, like Obi Wan. It's just a big void.
July 22, 2009, 1:17 p.m. CST
I Liked this one. What impresses me about the Yates Potters is how the get better and more confident when it comes to cuting out huge chunks of the books. And man, the left out a lot this time. And I didn't miss it. <p> I was surprised when they left out the battle at Hogwarts and Gandalf's funeral. Cutting the battle was a bold move. But when you think of it they reduced the attack to what it's all about: Snape kills Dumbledore. <p> Just like after every Harry Potter movie I keep asking myself how they'll manage to bring their story to an end with all the things yet to come that they have not even set up yet. The most problematic in this case probably being the missing information about the other horcruxes. But with probably more than five hours of screen time ahead of them I'm confident they'll figure out a way. <p>
July 22, 2009, 4:54 p.m. CST
I agree with everything Fluffyunbound has said.The movie was great until about the last 20 minutes and it falls flat on its ass.The reveal of Snape as the half blood prince was so undramatic and not at all what I pictured.Gambon has played Dumbledore as more of this buffonish old man who stumbles around in the background and wish Richard Harris would have lived if only to fulfill this one role.The biggest travesty of the film however was there was no big battle at the end.That was Harry's coming of age moment and it was totally botched.So sad really.It was a great book
July 22, 2009, 6:10 p.m. CST
In some ways I thought the film was one of the best since the first two. It actually stuck to the book for the most part without reinventing half of it. On the other hand... the ending was completely blown and suffered of massive anticlimax. They had all of this buildup for The Battle At Hogwarts, but then just had the bad guys waltz out the front gate instead, unchallenged by anyone but Harry. They didn't even have Harry hurl spells as he raced after them. Also, there are LOADS of scenes which could've/should've been added and would have made the film seem more complete and understandable to anyone who hasn't read the books (eg. nearly all of the memories which allow the audience to understand who Voldmort/Tom Riddle was, where he comes from in life, who his family was, etc) while there are other scenes (relationship scenes) which were really redundant and didn't need to be there. So, in short, brilliantly made... MUCH better than the last couple or so films... but horrible, horrible direction in cutting up the screenplay to fit the standardized time limits. FILMMAKERS: you know, if you were to make a film WELL enough, people would honestly not care how long it is! Learn from Professor Slughorn's hourglass. Make it interesting and time stands still.
July 22, 2009, 6:17 p.m. CST
It's REALLY frustrating that they introduced a new villain, made him seem very manacing, feral and important, but gave absolutely NO background information on him. For instance, certain scenes would have seemed SO much more thrilling had they mentioned 1) he's a werewolf, 2) he's the werewolf who infected Lupin as a child, 3) he LOVES to attack, maul and infect children. When he managed to get slipped into Hogwarts, in the book he was like a starving fat boy in a candy factory! (Unfortunately for him, all the kids he ran into had taken a drop of Harry's liquid luck. I think. Right? Or did he infect someone in book 6...?)
July 22, 2009, 6:23 p.m. CST
Wasn't the reason Harry was so cold toward her at the end SUPPOSED to be because she (along with many others) continued to doubt that Snape was responsible for Dumbledore's death? They made it seem like Harry was just being a dick.
July 23, 2009, 5:48 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
Listen, I really understand that people don't like the film (though I LOVED it), and people were annoyed at changes made from the book (though I think the criticism about the filmmakers bowing to standardized time limits is pretty ridiculous - in fact they push the time limits for a kids' film as far as they can). But, chaps, we need to be speaking the same language, even when we disagree. A 'buffoon' is (dictionary definition) 'a ludicrous figure, a gross and usually ill-educated or stupid person'. That is NOT the way Gambon is playing the part. The feeling I get with Gambon is that he has an increasingly heavy heart as the film goes on, as he realises the devastaton (to Harry & co but also to himself) that Voldemort's return will wreak. Look, I LOVE the wise old mentor figure, like Obi Wan, but JK Rowling isn't doing that. This guy gets scared, and part of Harry's growing process is realising that even Dumbledore is vulnerable. Richard Harris was a wonderful, wonderful actor, but I think that Gambon has been brilliant. (& what a voice!)
July 23, 2009, 7:16 a.m. CST
I agree that Gambon is a fine actor but he completely lacks charisma, if the role of dumbeldore wasn't already established well by Richard Harris people wouldn't care about this character now. I found his death scene to be completely unemotional, now that, is an injustice to the character that I had no care whatever he died. This hsould have been the death scene to end all death scenes. I think this had more to do with Yates poor directing though.
July 23, 2009, 7:17 a.m. CST
I would agree with you that Gambon has not played Dumbledore as a buffoon. That was not my complaint. I would disagree with you that Dumbledore is not supposed to be Obi Wan; Rowling has stated in interviews that Dumbledore is supposed to be the "hero mentor" archetype, and that the entire reason he has to die in "Prince" is because she's following the hero story template and at this part in the story the mentor has to die so that the hero will understand that he has to grow up and that the mentor won't be there to pull his ass out of trouble any more as the final conflict is set up. And the way Harris was playing Dumbledore, that would have resonated on the screen. At the end of "Chamber of Secrets", the emotional connection between the characters was established, and the mentor relationship was established. But in the subsequent films that was gradually pissed away because Gambon seems like a glorified extra or like he's playing Dumbledore in "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern at Hogwarts". Whether that's solely the result of his work or whether there are directing and screenwriting problems with these films is an open question.
July 23, 2009, 7:59 a.m. CST
This Harry Potter was boring and drawn out. This coulda been done in 90 mins. Why did they introduce that girl on the train, she had nothing to do with anything. This was the Superman Returns of the series.
July 23, 2009, 9:34 a.m. CST
<p>Was never a big fan of the series, but for some reason, it felt comfortable to get another installment right now. And given that this just may be the worse year for movies yet, it felt better than it was, by comparison. It also felt a little more cohesive than the previous installments.</p> <p>I was, however, getting a little bored by the end and I felt the resolution was a bit of a let down. Hearing people here describe the book ending, I would have preferred to see that. I would have also liked to have gotten a better sense for who Tom Riddle was. In any case, I definitely liked it better than the last one.</p>
July 23, 2009, 3:31 p.m. CST
It must be tough to take a cherished book series and adapt it into a film. I can't remember the last time I heard throngs of people praise a book adaptation into film although I am sure people here can name 10 for me. <p> I went in cold not having seen the previous 2 movies or read the books beyond #3. That being said I really enjoyed the movie. It seems maybe more so than others who have read all the books and can point to all the things that were left out, which is totally a fair point and one I can agree with. <p> Sure it was dark, and I never felt I would love the resolution as the film progressed as I know the story continues. But I love how the actors have grown in the movies and how Harry is more confident in his role as the chosen one. He lost his parents and now his mentor yet he knows he has to fight on and he realizes he does have family in his friends willing to fight on with him. <p> Overall I though it was a pretty solid film even though it did feel a bit like a filler movie advancing to the final showdown. I want to see it again after I finish reading the GoF, OOTP and HBP this weekend.
July 23, 2009, 6:07 p.m. CST
an absolute load of shit. What the fuck is the deal with flying around on broomsticks? What is this, Bewitched?
July 23, 2009, 6:49 p.m. CST
July 23, 2009, 8:20 p.m. CST
Dare: give one episode of Bewitched in which someone actually rode a broom.
July 23, 2009, 8:23 p.m. CST
What girl was introduced on the train? What movie were you watching? Or was this your first Harry Potter movie?
July 23, 2009, 8:31 p.m. CST
People should have left the theater crying after Dumbledore's death. Nobody was even sniffling or teary-eyed. I went back and re-read that scene and was more emotionally moved than I was in the theater. With more senses engaged, it SHOULD be even more powerful... or at least nearly so. I hate to say it but his unique take on Dumbledore just didn't sell the character or give anyone an emotional investment enough to care that he died.
July 24, 2009, 6:25 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
...was no less moving than Obi Wan Kenobi dying, or Qui Gon Jinn dying, or Gandalf dying, or Professor X dying. (And, by the way, Professor X's funeral makes me thank them for not doing Dumbledore's funeral.) I actually thought it was MORE moving than those scenes. What were you guys expecting? One of David Yates' plus points is that he doesn't overdo these moments.
July 24, 2009, 9:34 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
Hooper has confirmed he's not coming back for Deathly Hallows. And he hints that Williams is back. Now, I am a big fan of the Hooper scores. They are funny when they need to be, and sinister when they need to be. Love the Umbridge cues. Love the scary music throughout HBP. Love the way they make the world feel all grown-up. But.... I AM SO HAPPY IF WILLIAMS IS BACK! The idea of him revisiting his scores but with a grown-up attitude is AMAZING.
July 24, 2009, 10:50 a.m. CST
Well Mr Gorilla, I would certainly argue that obi-wan's death was more emotional. Qui-gon's is a bad comparison because you are comparing it to another bad film, same with X3. Dumbledore deserved a more emotional and epic death because we have6 films to know this character, not one. Now, Gandalf dying was way more emotional and epic. Comparison's are useless but I think msot agree it was a pathetic and unemotional scene which no one seemed to give two shits about leaving the theatre.
July 24, 2009, 12:48 p.m. CST
Orcus just saw it this morning and loved it. Orcus has to admit that a funeral scene would have given more of an emotional impact as well as some form of closure than the wand raising thingy
July 25, 2009, 8:29 a.m. CST
It's actually pretty hard to get anything 'NOOOOooooo!' into one of these Avada Cadavra' deaths because the whole thing about them is that they're so quick and casual. I won't have a thing said about Gambon though; he's too godd and he's been good for too long and most of you haven't seen his real work, just as most of you think that McKellen was so great in LOTR whereas, from a technical point of view, both Dumbledore and Gandalf are stick-man characters, sleepwalking parts for any old fella with a grain of skill. I'm sure McKellen privately regards Gandalf with as much professional contempt as Gambon does Dumbledore or Guinness openly did Obi Wan Kenobi. These are not parts, not characters; they're symbols that children invest in; beardy images of God, fairy-tale granpas.
July 25, 2009, 9:30 a.m. CST
Why did he and his costars get matching tattoos to celebrate their work? Early interviews with Alec showed that he was enthusiastic about the character. It wasn't until later after it took off world wide did the contempt creep in . Then there was the story when a kid told him he saw SW 100+ times (it was a triple digit number) .
July 25, 2009, 9:34 a.m. CST
http://www.amazon.com/Star-Wars-Vault-Treasures-Memorabilia/dp/B001SSBDS6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1248532443&sr=8-1 The interview is on the CD
July 26, 2009, 12:57 p.m. CST
Professor x did not die.
July 26, 2009, 4:16 p.m. CST
and liked it. I have read all the books and I didnt.I thought the film looked great. I felt short changed. especially by the end. Maybe they deceided that Dumbledore funerals would cost too much money. I thought that the sixthe film would have been the one where they all stepped up to the plate. But I was wrong. I have no faith that the deathly hollows will be as intense as they say it is. david yates: ok Danny, be intense? ok... I cant see danny radcliffe acting intense or Rupert grint or emma watson.
July 27, 2009, 2:40 p.m. CST
Don't be spouting Black Sabbath lyrics and calling then your own! The Wizard was on their first album and any Sabbath fan knows that YOU didn't write it...
July 29, 2009, 5:28 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
I thought he did? Wasn't he kind of torn apart bit-by-bit? Anyway, you could say that neither did Gandalf, Qui-Gon Jinn or Obi-Wan. And, in a sense, Dumbles is still alive in that he is in that painting in the Headmasters' room.
July 30, 2009, 1:13 a.m. CST
While I appreciate Yates' knack for gently tidying up some of the flaws in the later novels, I wish he wasn't such a maddeningly inconsistant director. A third of this film is wonderful, and a third of it is infuriatingly bad. And what was up with everything being shot in ultra-soft lighting and fuzzy focus? Are the kid actors already looking that old that they have to resort to optical tricks to make them look like teenagers?
July 30, 2009, 10:17 a.m. CST
Orcus is curious
July 31, 2009, 9:58 a.m. CST
by Mr Gorilla
Yeah, right. That's why a director like Alfonso Cuaron directed one. Because he's just a girlie ponce. And you know better, because you are so much more intelligent and grown-up. Hell, on your good days I bet you don't even mispronounce Proust. Dude, seriously. Have you even been following these films? I totally grant you that the first two were kids' films. But as of Prisoner of Azkaban, they have been growing up. This new one, for example, contains some really quite disturbing ideas and sequences - if you have anything resembling an imagination.
July 31, 2009, 10:19 a.m. CST
by just pillow talk
Your manliness is quite manly. I hope you have a part in The Expendables. They should bottle you and sell you to these "girlie poncy kids". <p>Am I right in assuming that you follow the ways of 2for2true?
Aug. 1, 2009, 4:46 a.m. CST
First of all I am not a real big Potter fan , I have only read the first two books....but have seen each of the movies as they hit the theaters. What I would like to know after watching this one is why does it seem with each movie that more and more things are missing from the Potter world, the main things I have noticed are how come the ghosts are no longer at hogwarts (John Cleese etc......) and when there playing Quidditch why is the golden snitch no longer a part of it, (I could have swore that was the the biggest part of the game in the first movie???????????) since I have not read past the first two books are these types of things also missing in the books??? I know to most I sound like a idiot but please help me understand what I must have missed.
Aug. 2, 2009, 1:09 a.m. CST
All of the books go into lots of little details about the wizard world. Specifically, books 3,4,5 and 6 have full Quidditch games and golden snitch chases; and, all of the books have the Hogwarts ghosts. The movies, though, have cut back and changed things for two main reasons: 1.) because of obvious time limits, and; 2) to mix things up a bit from movie to movie in order to keep things feeling at least a little fresh for common movie fans.
Aug. 2, 2009, 1:34 a.m. CST
A few examples of where the movie was infuriatingly bad - the opening scene where Dumbledore meets Harry in the London underground after Harry flirts with a random waitress. (I get why the director might have wanted to open with something different than the usual departure from the Dursly's house, but that was the best alternative they could come up with?! Really?) All of the memory scenes with young Tom Riddle. (We are supposed to believe that back then no one suspected how evil and dangerous Tom was, yet they cast an actor to play him who looks like Damien's more evil brother. That kid could never have fooled anyone. It's almost farce when Harry asks Dumbledore if he knew he'd just met the most evil dark wizard of all-time.) All of the scenes where they intentionally reveal, for who knows what reason, exactly which side Snape is truly working for. (That was one of the biggest running mysteries of the entire series, and the big cliffhanger the book left us with to be answered by book 7. It was senseless to give that away now when there should have been a bigger payoff in the last movie. What a waste.) And of course, the entire finale. (For reasons unknown this movie almost seemed designed to specifally underplay all of its biggest emotional moments except for the romances. Very odd. And the lighter thingy with the wands over Dumbledore's corpse was so-o-o-o-o bad as to defy my abilities to ridicule it.) Also, I ask again, what was up with shooting the entire movie in eye straining ultra-soft light and fuzzy focus?
Aug. 2, 2009, 1:38 a.m. CST
...it's never explained in the movie how Dumbledore knows to look for a Horcrux in the cave by the sea. The movie makers apparently forgot that little detail.
Aug. 2, 2009, 2:21 p.m. CST
...during the memory of Dumbledore meeting Riddle, there are several flashes to items in the room. One of them is a picture of the rock in front of the cliff.
Aug. 2, 2009, 2:25 p.m. CST
It was big, yeah, but the only 3d were several scenes at the beginning. It's nice to watch a 40' tall hottie in 3d, but no battles? Not even a quidditch match in 3d? Frustrating. Next time I'll wait to hear what scenes are in 3d before I bother to spend the extra coin.
Aug. 2, 2009, 5:19 p.m. CST
Especially for anyone who hasn't read the books. Sure, the movies often require brevity to fit into the time constraints; however, in this case they went a little too far and it feels like there is a scene missing.
Aug. 3, 2009, 9:48 a.m. CST
Oddly enough, the Actor who plays lil' Voldy is related to Ralph Fiennes, so Orcus guesses evil runs in the family :). Since there seems to be a restructuring of the 7th book into 2 movies we'll have to see if there is a different payoff for Snape. Right now we have an incopmlete picture. On a side note, the who soft lighting seemed to have stuck since Azkaban. It would have been interesting to pull a Matrix and have 2 different lighting schemes for the Muggle world and for the Wizarding world though
Aug. 9, 2009, 2:11 p.m. CST
by nolan bautista
the whipped cream on Whoremoines lips..deeeeliciuos!!..schwing!!
Aug. 10, 2009, 2:49 p.m. CST
if you were 12
Jan. 5, 2010, 8:25 a.m. CST
Indeed, it'll seem like a rediscovery of the series when you get into the books, Harry. There is a helluva lot missing from the movies, but the movies are very enjoyable as they are.
Jan. 5, 2010, 10:32 a.m. CST
Jan. 5, 2010, 2:58 p.m. CST
March 15, 2011, 6:38 p.m. CST