Movie News

As We Come To The Final Film... Take A Look Back At HARRY POTTER Through The Years!

Published at: July 10, 2011, 9:29 p.m. CST by Nordling

Nordling here.

When the first of the HARRY POTTER books came out, I was already well into adulthood.  I don't even remember hearing about their popularity until THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN came out, and when GOBLET OF FIRE came to the bookshelves the first film, directed by Chris Columbus, was well into production and I remember a level of anticipation on par with THE PHANTOM MENACE, especially from my good friend Megan Murray, who was a gigantic fan.  She'd read the books along with her daughter and became instantly hooked.  She couldn't get into LORD OF THE RINGS, but POTTER?  A kid trying to grow up the best way he can in an increasingly hostile and cold world?  People could relate to that, especially after 9/11.  I remember that horrible day well, but I can't imagine what a kid, 10 years old as the Towers fell, would have thought.  It must have seemed like something out of a movie.  That Christmas, HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE came out a mere two months afterward, going head to head with FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING that year.  It seemed fantasy - real fantasy - had come to theaters after a really long drought, and as a movie geek I couldn't have been happier.

I read the books myself, to see what the fuss was about, and I got instantly hooked as well.  I started reading a little before the first film came out, and when I finished GOBLET OF FIRE, I remember comparing it to THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK in terms of its story and sweeping emotion.  Once that first film came out, I was well on my way to being a Potterphile, and although I didn't attend the midnight openings when the books went on sale until DEATHLY HALLOWS, I felt hooked in a way that I hadn't felt since I was a child, reading THE LORD OF THE RINGS for the first time.  Too many cynics out there don't realize - or refuse to realize - that J.K. Rowling is actually a damn good writer, and you could see her get better as the books progressed.  

But what makes these books and films resonate as well as they do?  I don't think it's that difficult - the entire series is about growing up, and just because it takes place in a world of dragons, magic, and broomsticks doesn't make it any less relevant to kids - who aren't really kids anymore.  Sure, some of the books relied a little too much on the Scooby Doo reveal, but she got it right where it mattered - in the books' portrayal of childhood, the wonder and amazement of those years before adolescence, then the awkward and strange years of being a teenager, through all the tragedies and triumphs, all the way to adulthood.  Very, very few authors have been able to write about those years as successfully as Rowling did, and to that core audience.  Her books said to them, yes, things will get bad.  There will be moments beyond bearing.  But you have your friends, and those relationships and bonds will see you through rough times.  And once you pass through them, those times will be all the sweeter.

These films were in real danger of not being nearly as good as they were.  In fact, if J. K. Rowling hadn't taken such control over her story early on, we might have gotten something fairly awful.  The first two films are a little long and have a lot of material to get through, but once we became immersed in the world, Alfonso Cuaron made PRISONER OF AZKABAN and the films found their voice apart from the books, and became quite wonderful. Columbus had the most difficult job in making the world, and it has paid off for the series as Cuaron, Mike Newell, and David Yates have benefited from his casting and his vision.  Plus we can't forget Steve Kloves' contribution - his scripts truly brought the characters alive.

Of course, Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint *are* Harry, Hermione, and Ron - and they always will be.  But what's astounding isn't only that these kids turned out as great in the films as they did, but that practically all the child casting turned out wonderfully.  Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy - he's terrific in the part.  So's Matthew Lewis as Neville Longbottom, and although I've felt that his story got shorted in the films, he's played the part well, and I can't wait to see it pay off for him in the final film.  Plus we got actors like Devon Murray, Katie Leung, Alfie Enoch, James and Oliver Phelps - and all are wonderful in their roles.  And then there are the adults - Richard Harris was wonderful as Albus Dumbledore, and if Michael Gambon suffered a little at first in taking over the role after his death, Gambon found his own way into the character and made it his own just as much as Harris did.  Maggie Smith as Professor McGonagall is great as well, and all the British, Irish, and Scottish actors that have passed through the POTTER films through the years are well known and excellent in their roles.  The only two missing, really, are Ian Holm and Ian McKellen, and we all know what they did.  Finally, there is Alan Rickman as Severus Snape, the most complicated and tragic character of the series.  I can't wait to see that story conclude in the film, and Rickman will probably bring the house down.

If a child was 10 years old when that first book came out that child is well into their twenties at this point and these films and books have just as much weight to that adult as the STAR WARS original trilogy does for my generation. In fact, these kids have it better - while we suffered the Prequels, there isn't a single "bad" POTTER film in the lot.  Sure, the first two are a little ponderous, but they're nowhere near as bad as the Prequels turned out to be, and once the film series found its voice in PRISONER OF AZKABAN, there was no looking back.  These films are genuine classics, a great fantasy series that will be shared for generations to come.

So now we come to it, the final film, released this Friday.  I'm seeing it tomorrow, and I expect, just on the buzz I've been hearing, that I'm going to love it.  Rowling certainly stuck the landing with the book, so I expect that David Yates will do the same with this one.  It was good that Warners split the last film into two parts - Rowling covered a lot of ground in that last book and for those payoffs that have been building up for 10+ years to have any real effect, well, you don't want to rush them.  As for myself, it will be fairly inpossible for me to judge the film separate from the books and the experiences I've had with them, and I imagine that will even be more so for those people who grew up with these films and books.  For them, it really will be the passing of an age.  I remember going to the midnight release party of DEATHLY HALLOWS at the bookstore, and I was surprised by the people there, all ages, from really young children, high school kids, all the way to a woman who I remember the teller asking her if she was buying the book for her grandchild and hearing her scoff and tell her, "No, this one's mine."  Will we see anything like HARRY POTTER touch so many people again?  Of course we will, but it may take some time, and it may not hit every generation the way HARRY POTTER has.  I'm sure at my screening there will be cheers, and tears, and applause, and I wouldn't want it any other way.  

Some things are beyond criticism, I think.  I have issues with the films, but almost all of them are about how they failed to get this thing or that from the books into the film, and I'm sure DEATHLY HALLOWS PART 2 will be the same.  But the audience experience with them will, I hope, be on par with those great experiences I had with EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, or RETURN OF THE KING, and that makes this journey well worth taking.  Cynics may scoff all they like, but they will be the ones in the darkness and cold, while I'll be in the theater, with the warmth of the love of the fans, and a story well told, and a hero we all can believe in.  Long live Harry Potter.  All is well.

Nordling, out.

Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • July 10, 2011, 9:32 p.m. CST

    ?

    by LawnWrangler

  • July 10, 2011, 9:36 p.m. CST

    Who in the hell is "Peter Yates"?

    by Robert79797979

    Hrmmm?

  • July 10, 2011, 9:37 p.m. CST

    I've enjoyed this series but...

    by notcher

    I have to admit I'm much more excited about a certain trailer before this final film than I am about the film itself. So maybe over time this series has actually lost my interest?

  • July 10, 2011, 9:37 p.m. CST

    I think these are just ok

    by Mr Soze

    Stopped watching after the Gary Oldham one

  • July 10, 2011, 9:39 p.m. CST

    Notcher

    by Robert79797979

    I've seen the trailer. It shows absolutely no footage, at all. All it does is talk about Bane for a few seconds, and that's it.

  • July 10, 2011, 9:43 p.m. CST

    Really effective use of 9/11

    by oogles

    Osama Bin Laden might as well be Tolkien.

  • July 10, 2011, 9:49 p.m. CST

    The David Yates movies just don't hold my interest

    by Larry Knowles

    I recently (today actually) rewatched all the Potter flicks. The last three David Yates movies are just ... forgettable. I truly am surprised that they kept giving the reigns back to this guy. The best movies of the series are #3 and #4. Also, Harry, I miss you. -Larry

  • July 10, 2011, 9:51 p.m. CST

    Why has it becoming suddenly cool...

    by carey adams

    ... to talk shit about these movies? The films, since Prisoner of Azkaban, have been fantastic. I feel the same way about them that I felt about Super 8. If you really do hate it then you are a pretentious fuck and more than likely do not like movies at all.

  • July 10, 2011, 9:54 p.m. CST

    Agreed, Yates is bleh

    by locater16

    I loved Azkaban and Goblet of Fire as movies, I thought Fire was even better than the book (not that hard though). But Yates just sucked all the magic out of the series for me. In fact I find it bizarre that some people who like the books also like the movies by him since they're incredibly different.

  • July 10, 2011, 9:58 p.m. CST

    Or rather

    by locater16

    Not to say that you couldn't like two, even widely disparate, interpretations of a story. But that so many insist that they are similar when they aren't at all.

  • July 10, 2011, 9:58 p.m. CST

    Doesn't really matter what you think of the books or movies

    by BlaGyver

    It is absolutely impossible to deny the significance of this movie coming out. It's a big fucking deal, fan or not. The Harry Potter series isn't Twilight, it isn't Transformers, or even Nolan's Batman movies. It is a full-on cultural phenomenon, one that has grown from a somewhat generational thing akin to Saved by the Bell and neon pants to something with real longevity. I won't even state if I'm a fan of the series or not, because it doesn't matter. This is clearly a big deal and it bums me out that there will definitely be people talking about how this doesn't matter at all on this talkback.

  • July 10, 2011, 9:59 p.m. CST

    I'm with you..

    by DrPhilHartman

    ..Nordling

  • July 10, 2011, 10:01 p.m. CST

    The only thing wrong w/ films 4 through 6 . . .

    by Nice Marmot

    . . . is that they didn't split them all into 2 halves like they did w/ 7. They all felt too rushed. Other than that, they've been good enough. But nothing like reading the books.

  • July 10, 2011, 10:01 p.m. CST

    NYEAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH

    by mbg98

    I think that the Wilhelm Scream should be replaced by the NYEAHHHHHHH in every movie that it's been in. Make it so, internets.

  • July 10, 2011, 10:05 p.m. CST

    NYEAAAGH!

    by JediWuddayaknow

    HAHAHA! I AM SO FUCKING FUNNY! DID YOU SEE HOW I GLOMMED ONTO THAT TIRED, SHITTY, PLAYED OUT FAD?!

  • July 10, 2011, 10:06 p.m. CST

    I'm Still Soooo Confused...

    by blhotz

    Why do some "adults" like this series? Sure if you were 10 when the first came out it's probably awesome and all that. But Nordling and all these other 25+ year-olds... how in the world can you start at the beginning by watching a bunch of ten-year-olds w/ wands?! And seriously this is NOTHING like Star Wars or other "adult AND kid movies" - this is a entirely kids movies that ends when the "kid stars" turn ~18.

  • July 10, 2011, 10:09 p.m. CST

    Damn you, David Yates!

    by D.Vader

  • July 10, 2011, 10:12 p.m. CST

    New book in 3-5 years...just watch

    by dead youngling

    It'll happen.

  • July 10, 2011, 10:14 p.m. CST

    I love the books and movies but

    by cobrakinte

    can someone explain to me why in GOBLET OF FIRE the bad guys didn't just turn one of Harry's school books or something into the portkey? It seems to me like that would be a lot easier than rigging a whole tournament, that took weeks to complete, and trusting that Harry would win, just to get him to touch the trophy. After I realized that it kinda ruined that book/movie for me. Am I missing something?

  • ...has been nice.

  • July 10, 2011, 10:23 p.m. CST

    blholtz

    by cobrakinte

    Why do adults like Goonies, Stand by Me, Super 8, E.T., IT, Wizard of Oz, South Park, etc.? Just because the protagonists are children that doesn't make the story any less interesting. You don't hate kids do you?

  • July 10, 2011, 10:26 p.m. CST

    dead youngling

    by boyalien

    you really have JK Rowling down as a speedy author there, sir. Even if she started writing a first draft TODAY a new book wouldn't be out for 3-4 years. If there is ever another Potter book, it won't be out for over a decade.

  • July 10, 2011, 10:31 p.m. CST

    Look, David Yates has so far sucked.

    by Vindibudd

    His movies are very bland and just don't have much imagination nor excitement. They are so completely lacking in urgency. It's like a dream where you want to move fast but everything is just slow. I think the kicker is that he doesn't really know how to end a movie. I don't come out of his movies going I CANNOT WAIT FOR THE NEXT ONE. Hopefully he redeems himself with this last one, the reviews are looking good.

  • July 10, 2011, 10:37 p.m. CST

    I just rented The Half-Blood Prince this weekend.

    by Raymar

    Dear God in heaven, that movie is boring. Just awful!

  • July 10, 2011, 10:40 p.m. CST

    Clip/Movie/Portkey

    by vicmackey1268

    First of all, even after the countless ABC Family Extended Edition marathons (like the one right now), all the trips down memory lane, I will never get tired of seeing these kids grow up. Second, The books are better written than the movies are told...coming from someone who never wanted to read the books originally, its damn fine writing and gets a lot more grown up and deeper than "children's book" titles it wrongfully is called by. Finally...the triwizard cup is already an established portkey...turning anything into a portkey is very difficult and handled by the ministry of magic...even in book 5 they said they would go broke trying to make a portkey that is unlicensed....my opinion is that touching the cup ported you out of the maze as the winner in front of everyone...instead, it was tampered with and the portkey, while doing what it was supposed to, had a detour magically put in.

  • July 10, 2011, 10:40 p.m. CST

    Never read the books...

    by Dranem

    or saw the movies (except for a bit here and there on TV) but I'm glad they got a whole generation of kids and even adults to read something besides a magazine. I was too old when they came out to really be interested, and at that time Star Wars and The Lord of The Rings was holding all my geeky attention as far as movies went. I have a son now, and when he is older I will read him all the books and probably watch the films then. I have no desire to run out and see it, but I'm glad there are people out there that get a kick out of waiting for movies to come out like I did starting with Return of the Jedi. Star Wars was my Harry Potter, and it will be interesting to see if it stands the test of time the same way.

  • July 10, 2011, 10:45 p.m. CST

    Movie Rankings/Reviews

    by dkent

    Harry Potter Reviews From my Goodreads blog for author at ScarySchool.com In honor of the final Harry Potter film about to be released, here's my brief reviews and rankings of the Harry Potter movies. Let me know your thoughts and opinions too! When I see the final movie this week, I will add it to the list. If you like, I'll do my book reviews as well! - Derek the Ghost MOVIE RANKINGS 1. Prisoner of Azkaban (A+) This movie could go down in history not only as the best Harry Potter movie, but one of the best movies period. Alfonso Cuaron took the proceedings to a whole new level of artistry, magic, and emotion that hasn't been matched. It's such a shame that he didn't continue with the series. The tiniest details made every moment magical that lesser directors would cut out, such as the tiny bird fluttering across the school grounds only to get whacked by the Womping Willow. The story time travel story was incredibly fun at every turn and the payoff at the end when Harry realizes that he must cast the Patronus himself his exhilarating and heartbreaking at the same time. The Dementors were done beautifully without feeling the need not to scare the little ones. Marauder's Map is amazing. Gary Oldman is amazing. The end credits are amazing. Can you name one thing that isn't? Above all else, I can watch this movie over and over without getting tired of it and discover new things every time. That's the mark of a great film and it holds up. 2. Goblet of Fire (A-) Mike Newell did a darn good job with this. It borders on great, but never quite achieves it. Harry's fight with the dragon stands out as an incredible piece of realistic and frightening VFX. Voldemort's return was done very well and the raw emotion at the very end was exceeded expectations and was appropriately tragic. The awkwardness at first was a brilliant realistic touch. The descent into darkness was done well, it's just lacking the artistic flair that Cuaron brought to it. 3. Deathly Hallows Part 1 (B+) - only saw this once, so its position may change. All in all, an entertaining film. Easily David Yates' best effort so far, but still frustratingly below par of Cuaron and Newell. 4. Sorcerer's Stone (B) - Even though Columbus was achingly family oriented here and the production design seems paltry in comparison to the rest of the films, it was still entertaining and he did do a good job bringing a lot of the details to life. I remember being in the theater and seeing the sign for Privet Drive and the theater going crazy. Sorting hat was great. It was in all a good introduction, but one that no adult wants to view multiple times. Works well for kids though. 5. Half Blood Prince (B-) - Good only for it's mood and dark storyline. Good drama with all the kids too. When I read the book, I thought it would be an impossible movie to make entertaining because the only real magic comes in the last 50 pages. BUT, they did manage to make the it entertaining throughout and the teen angst held it afloat. The changes at the end were sooo frustrating. No battle with the kids fighting the death eaters?! Come on! It was a nice touch adding the moment of trust with Snape, but when Dumbledore is killed, the true failing of the movie comes through because I did not feel a THING. I wanted to be crying my eyes out, but it didn't come close to how I felt when Cedric died. There was not at all the proper build in story and character to get us to the point of feeling bad about Dumbledore and it's a real, real shame. 6. Order of the Phoenix (C) - Yates' first movie of the series is so frustratingly mediocre I want to scream. The only thing that stands out is Staunton's performance as Umbridge. Other than that, it feels like a disjointed mess of scenes without any connection or emotional punch. It was the most fun book by far, but I never could shout AWESOME! at anything that happened. There was a serious lack of imagination here. Yates really didn't know how to construct a flowing narrative and there was not much artistry to the camera work. 7. Chamber of Secrets (C-) - It actually seemed pretty cool at the time, but the difference in the woming willow in this and the third film is the most obvious indication of what was possible and not accomplished. The story with the diary is just weird and doesn't play well. Dobby is mostly annoying. The basilisk fight was cool...but weird when Harry goes back at the end. Just meh. No desire to watch this one again.

  • July 10, 2011, 10:48 p.m. CST

    Alan Rickman, Nordling

    by vicmackey1268

    is amazing...pity they got rid of a lot of some of his best parts in the book. They better do him justice on Friday. In your review/talkback PLEASE include if his history and (well, best part of his character) is left in. Also I know they changed a key location of a certain scene of his to a boathouse...I'd like to know if its effective or cooler or what, since I heard it was to give him a badass moment.

  • July 10, 2011, 10:55 p.m. CST

    I have an odd indifference to this series.

    by ComSamVimes

    As someone said above...like it or not, this series is a huge cultural thing. I like that it got kids to read (and look forward to it) more than they had in while. I just can't get into any of it. Dragons, wizards, magical tom-foolery...by all accounts I should be eating this stuff up. I just can't. I don't know why. I liked all the movies thus far...not enough to rewatch any of them. Strange. Just strange. I wish I was excited about all of this as other poeple seem to be. I like that exciting feeling of being able to see the next chapter of characters I care about. And while it's fun to see people really get into this, I can't do it. Oh well.

  • July 10, 2011, 10:56 p.m. CST

    movie vs books

    by vicmackey1268

    no comparison....simply put the books are written better than the scripts, but thats usually the case (Game of Thrones being an exception). It is funny that before reading my list went 3,5,4,6,1,2 (7 i will rate as a combo of pt1/2) after reading the books... 4,3,1,2,5,6 (7 right now is a shoe-in for 1st since its getting the deserved 2 part treatment) Mike Newell got a little help from Alfonso and, I think, did a fantastic job on his only movie, especially for getting a tiny $1 million paycheck (columbus got $10 plus a portion of the gross for 1)...the graveyard scene is intensly creepy. side-note....first time I saw 5 i was like FINALLY some kick ass fighting!!! My gf turns to me and says "ummm, ya that sucked, read the book)...true...the book had such amazing fights....funny how our views change.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:01 p.m. CST

    comsamvimes...

    by vicmackey1268

    prolly stupid question, but have you read or attempted to read the books....sure it'll be in your mind the entire time during 1 and 2 that ur reading about a little kid learning magic but really, once 3 gets into the 4th chapter you'll really forget Harry's age or what age group mostly reads the books. I never wanted to read them (5 is over 800 pages)...I thought it was stupid...then I found the movies to be full of plotholes, wtf moments, stupid scenes where I'd be like "Why the heck didnt the guy just tellllll harry blah blah blah!!!!???" It was getting a little insane having to ask questions to fully understand a movie with a 13 year old or 15 year old..... so I read the books...Im on 7 (i'll finish by friday, i will)...and all the questions are answered, theres nothing i dont understand, and if anything, the movies are compliments to the book, not substitutes.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:01 p.m. CST

    haha blholtz, if you're going to accuse adult fans of Harry Potter

    by soma_with_the_paintbox

    of being manchildren, definitely don't use Star Wars to bolster your argument.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:01 p.m. CST

    Had a marathon recently...

    by Aaron

    ...not by choice. Girlfriend's daughter set up a ticket booth and all that so we could have a Harry Potter marathon before the last one comes out. We have gotten through the first three, and I must say, they are pretty awful movies. I also saw Deathly Hallows Pt 1 and it was just barely watchable. Read about ten pages into the first book and had to put it down. It's all baby stuff, but good for the kids. It makes them and their mothers happy. Not trying to be a hater, I am actually trying to give these movies a chance, they are just so boring and obvious and the visual effects are just wretched. But I will finish the marathon. Nanu nanu.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:05 p.m. CST

    mr_jacksons_macaulay_culkin_dick_blood

    by Zarles

    You have no room to be talking about dumb names.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:05 p.m. CST

    Oh yeah

    by Aaron

    As far as books v movies, I defer to the Star Wars "movies v extended universe" case: I am never going to read the books, so shit about "plot holes" this or "they left out" that does not apply. The movies are the movies.

  • I hope #8 delivers and doesn't botch the ending like LOST did.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:14 p.m. CST

    Final Film??? There will be more Harry Potter films in the future

    by Andy Pandy

    The franchise is worth like a hundred billion dollars

  • July 10, 2011, 11:14 p.m. CST

    dkent

    by maxwello

    I appreciate your concise reviews and mostly agree with them, aside from Goblet of Fire. HP:GoF needed to be two movies. The most glaring problem with thts Readers' Digest screen interpretation was the under-development of Cedric. If you hadn't read the book, you'd have to wonder why an audience would care about him. I know that they had to edit very seriously to get the lengthiest book of the series down to a single movie, but they should have cut out a few minutes of dragon fleeing to add a scene or two that would have let Cedric's character come to life a bit more. A well-written interaction with Cho or Harry might have done it. I suspect people who read the books went in knowing that he was supposed to be noble, brave and beloved and attached those memories from the book to the character portrayed in the movie, and that they subsequently have forgotten how two-dimensional the on-screen version of the character was.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:20 p.m. CST

    Mr. Jackson's whatever the fuck your name is

    by BlaGyver

    Kinda weird criticism. It's fantasy. Luke Skywalker, Frodo Baggins, Gimli....other conventionally weird names in literature and film. Also, your name is fucking retarded.

  • Goblet of Fire is the best. And Columbus's Potter films were pretty damn good. He should have directed the last two and let Yates fade away directing Ambien commercials.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2n6FvxE7Dc&feature=related

  • July 10, 2011, 11:31 p.m. CST

    Or maybe even this?

    by Darth_Kong

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kIu7vRjxHs

  • July 10, 2011, 11:31 p.m. CST

    How do I git me one of them new fangled magic wands?

    by Darth_Kong

  • And I ended up at a midnight release for the books party at Borders book stores with her and her younger siblings (and their friends), who had grown up reading the books. Their excitement was contagious.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:35 p.m. CST

    @inked

    by SobchakSecurity

    "... to talk shit about these movies? The films, since Prisoner of Azkaban, have been fantastic. I feel the same way about them that I felt about Super 8. If you really do hate it then you are a pretentious fuck and more than likely do not like movies at all. " Uh, what? Since when did hating, or not liking, or not being much a fan of Harry Potter in the first place suddenly make one a pretentious fuck? Seriously. Potter fans don't have the per capita say on what does or does not make one a movie fan at all. This is nerdier than thouness at it's worst. I mean, I have my nerdy tendencies sure, but going around acting superior doesn't help in any ways. So stop it. Now. I'm not much of a Potter fan, but a fan of so many other franchises, does that not make me a pretentious fuck according to your warped standards? "and more than likely do not like movies at all. " Bullshit reasoning quote right there folks. Just cause we don't nerdgasm in our pants like these Potter nerds, oh wow. We aren't true movie fans apparently! Don't let them tell you what to do. Super 8 was really by the numbers and predictable as well, with little to no characterization,esp regarding the alien. What was so great about it? Also, I don't hate Harry Potter at all. It just was never my thing. I've got nothing against the success of the books or the movies, and am glad for all those involved who have benefitted from it, it's just this kind of asshole reasoning and logic strikes me the wrong way. It's not enough for you to simply enjoy it. You have to go and turn it into a fundamentalist crusade making you really no different from a con artist televangelist in many ways. Yes I know this sounds a bit harsh, that was my point to do so, but this had to be said.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:39 p.m. CST

    The only two missing are Ian Holm and Ian McKellan?

    by D.Vader

    How about Bob Hoskins, Patrick Stewart, Daniel Day-Lewis, Brian Cox...

  • July 10, 2011, 11:39 p.m. CST

    Oh and.....

    by SobchakSecurity

    The Big Lebowski, amongst many titles I could come up with, but with my screen name and all, is better than all of the harry potter books and movies, FACT! :-P Also let's add on Goodfellas, The Good The Bad And The Ugly, Miller's Crossing, so great yet so overlooked, The Thing, fuck yeah!, Boogie Nights, it's hard very hard for a person to not like this movie, and if you don't, you simply have no soul, relax, that part was a joke, Superman The Movie, The Wild Bunch, hey potter nerds, watch this and grow some balls and man hairs!, Bring Me The Head Of Alfredo Garcia, now THAT'S Magic there, Friday The 13th Part 6, Zombie Jason!, The evil dead series, my money's on the deadites if it ever get's down to evil dead vs harry potter, Aliens, Robocop, Starship Troopers, The Searchers, yeah. right. Harry Potter's as good as the searchers or better. Excuse me as I insultingly laugh in your face. Star Trek 2 Wrath Of Khan, and Rambo First Blood.

  • He's given him the shaft in every film. So much for forethought.

  • I'm sure you'll be laying that moniker to rest alongside your Cold_Dead_Corpse soon enough.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:44 p.m. CST

    Cornelius FuckleButt!!!!!

    by SobchakSecurity

    LMAO!!! Best post right there!!!! Oh man! That might be my new name on here!!! Yes!!! Let's make up sexually suggestively funny harry potter names!!! Peniserus Snape Vaginy Weasley Fucklemort Aldous Asshole Shitty Cuntrariat Cuntiferous Fluffy Cumsalot Lupus Mchandjobus Menstrilius Menstravius Blowjobs Youwillswallowus Jenny Mctits Ah! Come up with your own!

  • July 10, 2011, 11:46 p.m. CST

    CobraKinte

    by D.Vader

    Well, assuming that the villain in Hogwarts could get at Harry's stuff to turn it into a Portkey, it would also have to happen at a very specific time. Communication between the villain while at Hogwarts with Voldemort out in the world would be, I imagine, very difficult. Therefore, they went ahead and planned for a very specific night at which the big ceremony to rebirth Voldemort would take place. It would be up to the villain (fine I'll just call him Mad-Eye) to make sure Harry got there at the right moment. Make a Portkey out of anything Harry touches, and then you have to wait for Harry to touch it and be teleported, and you can't be standing there forever in a graveyard hoping he decides to open that bag of candy you gave him. It was a plan with a long wait and a very specific time-frame with which both sides would build towards. Doing it last second just wouldn't/couldn't work very easily.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:50 p.m. CST

    3 is my favoutite book, 4 is my favourite film.

    by blackwood

    I was pretty hard on Curon for his film, because book 3 was where I fell deeply in love with the series. It's definitely the film where the franchise arrived. But GOBLET was the most film-able book. I didn't miss any of the stuff that was cut. I think it's the best adaptation, the perfect bridge between between what the books are and what the films try to be. Yates... I don't feel his films in the same way. GOBLET was the last one I saw in the theatre, but I'm definitely seeing this on the big screen. Preferably opening weekend. I'm debating 3D -- I need to read more impressions about it. If they pulled it off I'm game. I'm feeling very Potter-mania right now. Maybe that's what was missing for the Yates films. I had finished the series, I think, by the time Phoenix came out. I had had my conclusion. Maybe I just checked out of the films then, because they were always cool, but secondary. The thing that mattered was over. But it's cool with this film, because I'm able to feel it all over again -- the excitement of the final chapter of a well loved and well told adventure. The books are above reproach and posturing. If you don't dig them, fine, no worries. But they only thing the series is an affront to is the cynical, dead heart of assholes everywhere who don't have a shred of soul in them. It's not about magic. It's about growing up. I think Harry Potter is timeless. The films aren't, not really, but the books will go on and on.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:50 p.m. CST

    Captain America will destroy, and is better than, Harry Potter, FACT!

    by SobchakSecurity

    This is actually one of those nerd debates that I think will actually be worth discussing. Normally I try not to get drawn into such things, but this one's worth it I think. I mean, comparisons in similarities aside, both are coming out within a week of one another. Captain America is going to kick the ever loving shit out of Harry Potter's wand waving wizard ass. Ol Cap is both the better character and story, and it has a much broader appeal. Only Potter nerds, and yes, there are alot, only really like Harry Potter. Just about everyone and there grandmother loves Ol Cap. So Cap wins overall for broad appeal amongst others. I will be so glad and filled with joyful glee when Captain America throws his mighty shield and uses it to knock harry potter's ass out of the top box office spot. I mean, let's face it, Harry Potter is a boy, Captain America is a full grown man, mature and capable of handling and dealing with adult things. Yeah yeah, Red Skull and Voldemort have there similarities. Fuck, they even look alike almost. But I think Red Skull will be remembered as the overall better villain. Ya know, I was lamenting the release date of Captain America for a while. But after discussing all of this, it will be worth it just to see him kick harry potters ass.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:50 p.m. CST

    what about RETURN OF THE JEDI?

    by JaredP

    doesn't anyone care about the capper to the star wars trilogy?

  • do you even listen or just repeat what other dumbasses say? he says "NNNYYYEEEAAAHHHHH..." and then it fades out. theres fucking "GH' on the end of it.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:54 p.m. CST

    So Cap wins overall for broad appeal amongst others.

    by D.Vader

    Doubtful. I fully believe Harry Potter will make more money than Cap. Its far more recognizable at the moment (and around the world too I bet) than Steve Rogers. Let's not forget the 3D ticket sales which Cap won't be getting, but Harry will.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:54 p.m. CST

    for the record, mbg98 got the voldemort yell correctly

    by Mel

    kudos to him

  • If that were true, then the Potter movies wouldn't have made nearly as much money as they have.

  • July 10, 2011, 11:55 p.m. CST

    Both posts above are quotes by sobchaksecurity

    by D.Vader

    I "quoted" them as such. FUCK YOU AICN TALKBACKS. This shit should have been fucking fixed by now.

  • Alot consider HBP to be ESB-like in nature, but GoF feels most like ESB, given that you are left in a cliffhanger situation where noone was sure what was going to happen next.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:02 a.m. CST

    d.vader...

    by SobchakSecurity

    Captain America is in 3-D. So, if you're going to be basing the quality of that, or any movie, on the 3-D alone, Captain America will benefit from that as well. Just accept it. Captain America will be, and is going to be, the better movie, and the one that ends up on more best of the year lists than Harry Potter cause more people are excited for and talking about it and it has that subtle hype. Well, maybe not subtle, but that feeling of it will be seen as a true classic to just about everyone. Whereas Potter is only seen as a classic by Potter fans, not the overall majority. I really don't mean to shit on the harry potter series, I'm just rubbing it into the fans who take it so seriously. Captain America will throw his mighty shield, and knocky Harry Potters ass out of the number 1 spot! Oh and Potter nerds going to see it over and over just so it stays in #1, doesn't make it count cause that's cheating, and by doing that, Captain America wins by default!

  • July 11, 2011, 12:08 a.m. CST

    Quotation marks sometimes fuck things up, here.

    by blackwood

    Not all the time. But once I nearly lost a whole hour of ranting about TRANSFORMERS because I used them in my first sentence. Anyway, sobchksecurity, I think you're going to lose this bet. Because Captain America is going to be awesome, but Captain America is nowhere near as relevant in the world as Harry Potter. Not even close. Fact.

  • Well, anyone who says someone didn't like there nerd franchise flavor of choice is pretentious, is probably a close minded nerd, kind of an oxymoron there, who won't watch anything beyond there nerd franchise flavor of choice. Now as for me, I have several favorite nerd franchises. Star Trek. Star Wars. Aliens. Robocop. Terminator. Ghostbusters. Transformers. G.I Joe. Lord Of The Rings. 2001:A Space Oddysey. And sci fi/fantasy/horror in general. But yeah.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:10 a.m. CST

    Superherohype claims there will be a Dark Knight Rises trailer

    by Mattman

    before Harry Potter. Fingers crossed.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:12 a.m. CST

    Captain America has always been, and will be "relevant"....

    by SobchakSecurity

    I put relevant in quotes cause it's one of those words I think should be retired. Cause I don't see how the relevance of something should determine it's quality. Anyways. Everyone has always loved Captain America. He just has that wide range appeal, like Superman. Super hero movies in general have had a wider appeal range than wand waving wizard boy. So yes, Captain America will throw his mighty shield, knock out wand waving wizard boys wand out of his hand, and then dum dum dugan will beat the shit out of him! :-)

  • Everyone's going to jump on the HP bandwagon and see the last one. A silly little comic book movie that's released 8 times a year has no shot in hell at HP. And you're basing all this off of some pretty decent Captain America TRAILERS. We all know the quality of HP movies (plus it hasn't had a negative review yet)....but to sit here and base a movie off of a trailer? hilarious. For all we know, Captain American is fucking trash.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:16 a.m. CST

    mattman i bet it's nothing more than a logo and a tagline

    by Mel

    arent they still shooting the movie? then again, super 8 had a trailer before they even cast it.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:20 a.m. CST

    "Revelant" doesn't determine "quality".

    by blackwood

    It determines box office. Duh. Oh fuck, you're one of those astroturfing studio plants. Ew. Go away.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:20 a.m. CST

    melgibsoncalledmethenword, funny name, but so,so wrong in your assesment....

    by SobchakSecurity

    Captain Cliche? At least try to be original when insulting and not cliche. Ooh! Punned! Silly little comic book movie that's released 8 times a year? Right. And you will be eating those words when you realize how wrong you will be when the time comes. Actually, there's been some early Cap screenings, reports are it's great, as I long knew it would be. I knew it was going to be something special when the announced they'd be doing it. Yes. People determine how worth it will be to watch something based on a trailer. That's how it works. Captain America is going to kick Potters ass. Watch.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:20 a.m. CST

    Worked in a corpo bookstore when the series first garnered the

    by Dennis_Moore

    moronic public's hysteria. Got tired of stacking the fuckers. Always thought Lemony Snicket was more interesting than Chamber Potter, so I recommened those, instead, or the old John Bellairs books (though, having been a fan of Books of Magic, I might have been biased out of loyalty). People who were kids then and are now early twenties -- Pokemon is more significant to them than Potter.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:21 a.m. CST

    Apples and oranges, guys.

    by DrMeyer

    Apples and oranges. Cap will blow all the other comics-based movies outta the water, since it appears Joe Johnston got it right. But Potter will take the box office biscuit on release, as it's the last of the series; if there's another, it'll be years away, after Jo has finally given in and written a new series that covers Harry and Ginny getting married and making babies, and I don't see that for a few years yet, if at all. Now, would you lot be nice and stop badmouthing each other? Btw, Sobchak, you forgot the two best sf franchises of all time, when you neglected to mention both Babylon 5 and Doctor Who. But those are personal preferences, your mileage may vary. I know mine does.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:24 a.m. CST

    Astroturfing studio plants? I can only wish....

    by SobchakSecurity

    Not that I'd do it cause that's a tool job, but I bet they get paid good. And it's relevant, not revelant. Learn how to spell. Well, relevancy and quality is it's own thing, but if you let what's only considered relevant to define and dictate your taste, well you're a tool who let's others tell you how to think. Relevancy plays a part in box office, yes that's the reality, but I try not to base quality on the money alone. Only tools do that. Whole other issue there. Relevancy can also mean jack shit.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:25 a.m. CST

    melgibsoncalledmethenword

    by Mattman

    Superherohype also *CLAAAIMS* it is a minute and 30 second trailer... Could be false (although they're fairly trustworthy), but we'll see. They've been filming for a while now.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:27 a.m. CST

    Oh, I see.

    by blackwood

    You're just arguing that you're retarded. Well then carry on, you have my support.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:28 a.m. CST

    sobchaksecurity

    by Mattman

    I think Captain America will be better than Potter. Deathly Hallows Part 1 left me with no desire to see Part 2. However, I think Potter will break records. The series is just too damn huge, and this final movie will bring in all the fans that the movies picked up along the way, both in theaters and on video. It's a massive franchise.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:29 a.m. CST

    Oh and one more thing...

    by Mattman

  • July 11, 2011, 12:30 a.m. CST

    Drmeyer, Oh, I love Doctor Who....

    by SobchakSecurity

    I've only seen the most recent series, Matt Smith, so I don't know what that says about me, and I don't care, on the dr.who fan/nerd scale, but I do really like the show/series. I've only seen the most recent one like I said. Always been aware of it and know it's been around like, forever it seems, early 60's, I just hadn't seen it before. Nothing against it or anything, just hadn't seen it. Then caught some episodes on bbc at a freinds place, and next thing, I was hooked. I think based on the enthusiasm,appeal,and love for the character/series alone, Cap will kick Potters ass. Just wait and see. It's not just apples and oranges, oh well it is, but this makes it alot more fun. Nerd series superior domination! Fate of the world is at stake! Babylon 5? I remember watching it, but idk, never got into it. I really don't know why either.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:34 a.m. CST

    Potter won't break records.....

    by SobchakSecurity

    Yeah. It will make alot of money. Duh. Succesful series have that has a built in guarantee. But this isn't going to be another Jaws/Star Wars/Indiana Jones/Titanic/Avatar/Jurassic Park. If that's your expectations, I think you're overstating HP's importance. Cap might do that, I'd bet on that, but it will kick potters ass at the box office.

  • Learn how to spell right, and you won't get butthurt as much. Simple enough even for an illiterate such as yourself to remember.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:37 a.m. CST

    JOHN WILLIAMS' MUSIC...

    by BILLY_BOOMSTICK

    ... has been the (main) missing ingredient from Goblet of Fire to Deathly Hallows Part 1 (and 2)... Go back and watch the first three movies again (especially Prisoner of Azkaban)... his scores were whimsical and epic at the same time.... I would have loved to hear his theme for Voldemort and maybe a march for the Deatheaters.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:39 a.m. CST

    Re-watching the blu-ray

    by proevad

    of the last film right now. Had to pee and saw this post. Yeah, I'll be in line Thursday night with people I love in their 30's, 20's, and teens. Make fun. Don't care. These have all been good--and in the case of two--staggeringly good.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:39 a.m. CST

    dkent

    by dkent

    yes, i agree Cedric could have been developed more in GOF, but I think they did enough with him to make us care...he was nice to everyone during the Tri Wizard Cup and when he helps Harry with the egg and then at the end when he tells Harry to get the cup for himself...all major actions that made us like him and not want him to die, so it worked for me.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:47 a.m. CST

    reboot

    by Orion

    What are the chances? And how soon?

  • July 11, 2011, 12:48 a.m. CST

    I wonder what it would have been like...

    by blackwood

    had Spielberg taken it on as rumored. I would have liked to see that film.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:13 a.m. CST

    It figures this "look back" is 5 minutes long

    by WINONA_RYDERS_PUSSY_JUICE

    I didn't take anything away from this series other than Voldemort wants to kill Harry. It's been an entertaining series, but I never got caught up in any of the characters and their stories. I feel pretty cold towards these movies.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:23 a.m. CST

    It was rumored Spielberg wanted to combine

    by seasider

    the first 3 books into one movie and possibly cast Haley Joel Osment as Harry. Of course Warner Bros. wanted to make as much money off these books as possible which meant at least one movie for each book. Spielberg at the time had his mind on other projects like Memoirs of a Geisha and A.I so he bowed out. We don't know how his version of HP would've looked. A lot of his critics refer to Hook as a reference which I think is ridiculous.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:25 a.m. CST

    Who cares. All the movies are shit.

    by highfunctioningsociopath

  • July 11, 2011, 1:38 a.m. CST

    @boyalien--Another book is probably being written now

    by dead youngling

    I'm an author and I know other authors. Another Potter book would not take a decade to get out. Personally I don't care one way or the other, and I may be completely wrong, but don't be surprised if we get an announcement that something funky is going on--could be announced by this Christmas then come out next Christmas...or never :)

  • July 11, 2011, 1:42 a.m. CST

    And I mean a book in the HP world, not with him.

    by dead youngling

    Secret website up--announcement coming on Thurs. Google More Harry Potter books

  • it's laughable.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:58 a.m. CST

    DAMN YOU MICHAEL BAY!

    by Sanyi

  • July 11, 2011, 2:02 a.m. CST

    vicmackey1268

    by ComSamVimes

    I have tried to read the books ages ago....before they started making the movies. Couldn't get into it, but maybe I'll give them another shot. I liked the movies just fine...not enough to care about plot holes, or look into things that I didn't understand...I dunno. Like I said..it's sort of irritating to have a hard time getting into something that's full of things I normally really like. Haha. Ill give the books another shot. I promise!

  • July 11, 2011, 2:09 a.m. CST

    Pale in comparision to the books.

    by Yamato

    Especially under the current director, 5 sucked balls, and I gave up after that. And fuck I hate the way Yanks call it the "Sorcerer's Stone". Its the Philosopher's Stone, it has been in lore for centuries.

  • July 11, 2011, 2:12 a.m. CST

    Great post, can't wait for thursday night!

    by Aidan

    Almost brought a tear to my eye there, Nordling :)

  • July 11, 2011, 2:16 a.m. CST

    British, Scottish and Irish Actors???

    by cushing1967

    Eh? English, Scottish and Irish Actors would have worked British and Irish actors would have worked British, Scottish and Irish actors is wrong!

  • July 11, 2011, 2:21 a.m. CST

    Consistently the most beautiful and well crafted blockbusters around.

    by Fortunesfool

    The Yates ones are bordering on 'art' at times. If most of you lot actually knew anything about cinema you would see this. Instead, you all just dismiss them as 'gay' kids movies.

  • Someone got kicked to the curb...

  • July 11, 2011, 2:32 a.m. CST

    ^^ Above should be in quotes ^^

    by Mattman

    This site continues to suck.

  • July 11, 2011, 2:33 a.m. CST

    La De Da De Da .... I like the prequels, Nordling

    by nico_laos

    So fuck you. Not everyone thinks like you, you know. Bitch.

  • July 11, 2011, 2:42 a.m. CST

    People hating on Harry Potter

    by chinofjim

    are dizzy muffins. People like blhotz, who claims these are just kids books/movies that don't compare to 'real adult/kid' fare like Star Wars Really? You stick up for Star Wars, the land of Jar Jar Binks, against Harry Potter flicks, where they even managed to give Dobby a dignified exit? A lot of AICNers are still just jealous that something new came along that they don't feel geeky ownership over. Even Harry Knowles is a patronising dumbas when he damns the films with faint praise as being 'supierior childrens movies'. This from the man who loved Attack of the Clones and who gave a free pass to Transformers 3.

  • July 11, 2011, 2:46 a.m. CST

    No Nordling, the movies are not classics.

    by one9deuce

    The books are a cultural phenomenon. And the movies are very well produced, very well cast and very well acted. But they are missing the magic that makes a classic. But PRISONER OF AZKABAN comes oh so close. It towers above the other films in the series, by a lot. Alfonso Cuaron is an artist, and he made a studio/art film hybrid that is magnificent and very cinematic. John Williams was obviously inspired and gave the film a brilliant score. Everything since has been steeply downhill. Mike Newell is a very competent director, but genre films are not what he does well. He does well with dramas. And actors. And what can be said about David Yates? He is a television director. And he will do exactly as the Studio tells him. There is NOTHING magical about the last four films. Which is ironic obviously.

  • July 11, 2011, 2:59 a.m. CST

    It's a Happy Meal. Have a Coke and a smile.

    by Darth_Kong

  • July 11, 2011, 2:59 a.m. CST

    This one's on me. ;)

    by Darth_Kong

  • July 11, 2011, 3 a.m. CST

    Shitting on Potter and defending the SW prequels

    by proevad

    All 7 (and most likely 8) of the Potter films are all much better films than any one of those turds Lucas shit out on the public. I'll rewatch Order of the Phoenix with all of it's problems 4 times before I watch that piece of shit Clones movie a second time. You guys are fucking lame. No one who really knows about film is buying your bullshit this time.

  • July 11, 2011, 3:01 a.m. CST

    Genderblender

    by one9deuce

    Your rambling posts at AICN that use some plot/character/theme of a movie to illustrate how shitty your childhood/adulthood are can be mildly entertaining, but can you at least be accurate? Voldemort isn't evil because he is merely "trying to stay alive", he is evil because he is trying to exterminate anyone that doesn't have pure wizard blood. Hence the term mudblood. Did you even read the books?

  • July 11, 2011, 3:08 a.m. CST

    Captain America

    by chinofjim

    Does not have much broad appeal outside of USA In many foreign lands it is being released simply as 'The First Avenger' for fear of destroying any appeal it might have

  • July 11, 2011, 3:10 a.m. CST

    chinofjim

    by proevad

    foreign lands? How about "other countries", you xenophobic fucktard.

  • July 11, 2011, 3:14 a.m. CST

    "Sure, the first two are a little ponderous...

    by kwisatzhaderach

    but they're nowhere near as bad as the Prequels turned out to be." <p> Anybody that thinks the first two Harry Potter movies are better than the Star Wars prequels is clearly insane.

  • The last few Harry Potter flicks, The Dark Knight, Thor, X-Men First Class, Hell, even Sherlock Holmes was a lot better than I expected. Why are North American Director's struggling to make great popcorn flicks? All we have over here is Michael fucking Bay, Brett Ratner, McG, Zack Snyder etc... while Spielberg can't make a good piece of entertainment to save his fucking life these days, Abram's is a Spielberg wannabe and Cameron spent 12 years making Dances with Thundersmurfs. Don't get me wrong, I liked Avatar but Cameron's movies have always lacked finesse in the writing and acting department, Abram's Star Trek was extremely well cast but the fucking retarded script ruined it for me and the less said about Indy 4 the better. Even when we do accidentally get a good movie (Iron Man) it's sequel is fucked because of egotistical douchebag actors (RDJ) and studio interference. In the case of the X-Men series, Fox didn't even hold onto Bryan Singer who made those movies the hits that they were. Meanwhile, all of the old masters are making nothing but shit like Zemekis.

  • i find mentioning HARRY POTTER in such a context with STAR WARS and THE LORD OF THE RINGS insulting. all that 7 HARRY POTTER movies have left in my mind are memories of endlessly repeating scenes of Harry and his friends taking a train to Hogwarts, messing around at the school, playing Quidditch, fighting some monster, and (especially after the last movie) running around aimlessly in forests. the movies are probably better if one has read the books, sure... but THE LORD OF THE RINGS films work without having read the book, and the STAR WARS movies never had books to begin with, and they work. so the only thing that comes to mind when i read the line "IT ALL ENDS", is "finally". what an empty experience.

  • July 11, 2011, 3:46 a.m. CST

    daniccus - Harry Potter is a romcom.

    by Darth_Kong

  • July 11, 2011, 4:31 a.m. CST

    proevad

    by chinofjim

    bandying about a grown up word like 'xenophobe' won't convince anyone that you are not a moron was I being xenophobic against US or non US folk? and what exactly is xenophobic about the use of the term 'foreign lands'?

  • July 11, 2011, 4:58 a.m. CST

    Harry Potter = Overrated

    by MajorFrontbum

    Actually, Harry Potter's films helped cure many people's chronic insomnia. So they do serve a purpose. In some Uganda and Myanmar, they use it as a diuretic.

  • July 11, 2011, 5:10 a.m. CST

    9/11?

    by Son of the Suns

    I'm not entire sure what a book, written in 1996, about a magical boy, living and growing up in England has to do with 9/11. But whatever, drop it into the article for effect.

  • July 11, 2011, 5:26 a.m. CST

    Some of the movies are better than others...

    by sonnyfern

    The first two films border on being freaking horrible, but they are 100% NOTHING but kid movies. The Prisoner of Azkaban was awesome, Goblet of Fire I think is my favorite one, most action in that one, and a killer ending, Order of the Pheonix I hear is the best book but as a movie is was freaking terrible, I don't even remember anything about The Half Blood Prince except the last 15 minutes, and the last movie was a total bore...too much time spent in the woods doing NOTHING. But this last movie looks freaking awesome. I just hate how bumbling idiots the adults are in these movies and how EVERYONE they get to teach the defense of the black arts class turns out to be completely EVIL. I kept waiting for Satan to turn up to teach the class...

  • July 11, 2011, 5:37 a.m. CST

    robert79797979

    by elsewhere

    You trollin? No footage for a 1min 33sec trailer? I find that hard to believe.

  • July 11, 2011, 5:53 a.m. CST

    There won't be A Starbucks in Hogwarts...

    by Carl

    because the English like tea, not coffee. Though there's teas in Starbucks, it is known as Starbucks Coffee and not Starbucks Tea.

  • July 11, 2011, 6:30 a.m. CST

    My sixth wife is dragging me to this.

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    CHOPPAH smells a divorce in his near future ... ... especially with a certain 'tot mom' soon to be on the market.

  • July 11, 2011, 6:43 a.m. CST

    STAR WARS meets LORD OF THE RINGS meets THE ACCUSED

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    No, I don't mean HARRY POTTER. I'm just trying to imagine Beaks's ideal film.

  • July 11, 2011, 7:27 a.m. CST

    killik

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Rowling will get the Lucas jones eventually. Prequels about Dumbledore and the rise of Voldemort. Sequels about Harry's kids. Lots and lots of bullshit to look forward to. This really is the STAR WARS of 'Generation Y' or whatever the fuck the media calls it, from the books to the movies. Just wait until all of these kids are in their 30s and 40s saturating media with their insufferable Potter nostalgia like the children of the 70s and 80s do with STAR WARS.

  • Parts one and two were OK if a little stodgy and cloying, part three was a genuinely terrific movie, part four was quite good, too, but the Yates movies have been hit and miss.

  • July 11, 2011, 7:37 a.m. CST

    These movies all blur into one for me.

    by knowthyself

    Where mostly nothing happens and the last few films are just "Voldermort is coming!" over and over. I don't feel the seven parts is justified. You could have told this story in three or four books max.

  • July 11, 2011, 7:39 a.m. CST

    As most of the talkbackers have lost interest in Ms. Granger..

    by LargoJr

    ...as she has achieved legal age.. LOL

  • July 11, 2011, 7:39 a.m. CST

    How long before a Harry Potter reboot?

    by zyuray2

    I'm sure they're already plotting it. A younger, hipper, urban Harry Potter, i.e. EDGY.

  • July 11, 2011, 7:40 a.m. CST

    How long before a Harry Potter reboot?

    by zyuray2

    I'm sure they're already plotting it. A younger, hipper, urban Harry Potter, i.e. EDGY.

  • July 11, 2011, 7:40 a.m. CST

    God I love these movies!

    by Mr Gorilla

    Not really the first 2, but from 3 on, definitely. Partly, it's very wonderful for me as a Brit to see Hollywood budgets lavished on something with British actors on screen. (Not, as in Lord of the Rings, or Pirates etc, Americans or Aussies doing terrible accents.) Second, seeing the kids growing up really has been amazing. For that reason, I'll always love the movies where the 'growing up' bit has been highlighted - GOBLET OF FIRE and DH PART ONE struck me as doing this particularly. I'm going in to this last film 100% invested in a huge cast of characters. Can't say that about many franchises.

  • The music, the magic, and the introduction to the world just can't be beat. It's the only one of the films where the world is exciting and new and it's great to watch potter, hermione, and ron all excited before things became drab, tweeny, and prepubescent.

  • July 11, 2011, 7:49 a.m. CST

    knowthyself: Voldemort

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Ha! Yeah, that's pretty much it. Voldemort shows up at the end of part four, and then in five and six he barely shows up at all. Most of what we learn about him is from flashbacks from other characters' points of view. Still, at least we get healthy amounts of backstory about him in the sixth book. The movie abandons that, and we're left with a dull affair that doesn't have any tension until the very end. Voldemort himself is a very unimpressive villain. The books and the films tell us over and over again that he's the most powerful dark wizard of all time, but it seems like his original reign of terror didn't last too long, and his revenge quest to get Harry Potter is dragged out and blundering. Shit, after he failed to kill Harry at the end of part four, there wasn't a Death Eater there who would have hit this incompetent whiner in the back with a killing spell? He couldn't kill the kid when he was a baby, and he couldn't kill him as a young teen. Wouldn't one of the Death Eaters rightfully begin to doubt him and want to seize the mantle of dark lord his or herself? Imagine a dark lord with no personal connection to Harry Potter whatsoever. That would certainly complicate things and add some REAL tension to the story. Harry's life is saved by some bullshit time and time again, so by the time the two have their final conflict in book seven, there's no reason to believe that Harry's in any real danger. Another dark lord who (shockingly) kills Voldemort at the end of four or the beginning five would have set about destroying the muggle and wizard worlds with little concern for Harry, who would have then have to become a hero not because he was 'chosen' to, but because he chooses to.

  • July 11, 2011, 7:52 a.m. CST

    Not a fan, but I admire how the cast stayed

    by MoneyGrabSequel

    for the entire run. A rare thing in franchise movies these days.

  • July 11, 2011, 7:54 a.m. CST

    Another problem with Harry..he's never done anything HEROIC.

    by knowthyself

    They save his ass at the end of every book but when has he sacrificed anything for his friends? When did he earn his popularity?

  • July 11, 2011, 7:57 a.m. CST

    If you want something beautiful and epic

    by Xen11

    watch Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles. That is the masterpiece series that many ignore for some reason.

  • July 11, 2011, 8:18 a.m. CST

    cant think of another film series that has consistently delivered

    by sith_rising

    there are highs and lows in each film, but whereas Star Wars, Trek, Indiana Jones, Superman, Spider-Man, X-Men, Aliens, Predator, Terminator, Die Hard, James Bond, etc have jumped the shark at one point or another, Potter just keeps getting better and growing with the audience. I didn't get into the movies until being forced to see GoF. The ending graveyard scene was fantastic, and got me thinking, "wow, this is turning into Star Wars-style mythology", and I was hooked after that.

  • July 11, 2011, 8:28 a.m. CST

    I tried...

    by Dkev00

    I just could not get into these movies. I found them kind of silly.

  • July 11, 2011, 8:37 a.m. CST

    re: "I was well on my way to being a Potterphile"

    by jim

    You gotta be real careful how you pronounce that.

  • July 11, 2011, 8:40 a.m. CST

    HAHAHAHA!

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    'Potterphile'!!

  • Yeah, at the expense of other people. THAT is the crime. Jeepers, what next? You going to tell us Hitler wasn't so bad, he was just trying to make Germany a nicer place to live?

  • July 11, 2011, 8:44 a.m. CST

    Knowthyself,

    by Errol

    If you are going to switch between books and film, of course you don't understand why it's "dragged on". There is so much that have never made it into the films, why do you think they've split (finally) the last book into two films? There is so much material they could have done that for every book from book 4 onwards. Harry's never done anything heroic? Philosophers Stone. Confronts Voldemort 1 on 1. Chamber of Secrets. Confronts Voldemort 1 on 1. Fights a giant snake by himself, with a small and rather ineffectual sword and no magic. Prisoner of Azkhaban, fights off more than 100 Dementors single-handedly. Flies the vicious carnivous flying horse, by himself. Goblet of fire, Harry confronts a dragon. Alone, no help. Sure he had an idea what to do, but he DID it. Harry rescues his friends underwater. No-one else did, only Harry. In the graveyard scene, he steps out from behind the grave and confronts Voldemort. Alone. Order of the Phoenix fights off Dementors outside of school to save his cousin, who he personally detests. No help available. Stands up to Umbridge first and alone out of the school. Harry himself teaches Dumbledore's Army defensive magic capability, of which he has shown to be far superior to any other student in Hogwarts. Harry leads the fight outnumbered against multiple Death Eaters in the Ministry of Magic. He fights an adult Deatheater side by side with Sirius. No help given. Half Blood Prince, fights an entire army of inferi single-handedly whilst Dumbledore is incapacitated. Deathly Hallows, fights Voldemort again. Alone, no help just him v Voldemort. Deathly Hallows, marches out to his own (certain in his mind) death. You need to pay a bit more attention, or redefine what "heroic" actually means...

  • July 11, 2011, 9:07 a.m. CST

    100% NOTHING but kid movies

    by proevad

    The first two were supposed to be exactly that, because GASP--the three main characters were kids. The books had a completely different tone before Prisoner of Azkaban as well--where do you think the lame ass conspiracy theory came from that she didn't write the 3rd book?

  • July 11, 2011, 9:08 a.m. CST

    knowthyself

    by proevad

    Roger Ebert would probably agree with you. Not bad company to be in.

  • July 11, 2011, 9:28 a.m. CST

    SobchakSecurity

    by D.Vader

    I was using quotes from you as the title of my posts, but for some reason, AICN's shitty talkback software erases the quotation marks, so it ends up looking like those were statements I was making, which is not true. I wanted to make sure there was no confusion over that.

  • July 11, 2011, 9:34 a.m. CST

    And Sobchak

    by D.Vader

    It appeared you were talking about which movie was going to make more money, and I completely disagree that its going to be Cap beating out Harry Potter at the box office at the end of the year.

  • July 11, 2011, 9:37 a.m. CST

    Oh just ignore GenderBlender guys

    by D.Vader

    One of the more obvious trolls lately here at AICN. Pretending to be a woman, pretending to be a movie fan, pretending to have been raped, pretending to know what she's talking about in regards to every genre film but also claims to hate the very thinks he/she is talking about. Trolling guys. Trolling like a dick.

  • July 11, 2011, 9:37 a.m. CST

    Vades is right. There's no way CAP beats HP7.2 at the box office.

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    TRANSFORMERS, HARRY POTTER and PIRATES will be your top three box office champs this year when it's all said and done.

  • July 11, 2011, 9:38 a.m. CST

    MelGibson

    by D.Vader

    Off the top of my head, I know Yates ignored the danger of Snape's Occlumency lessons in Order of the Phoenix, completely ignoring the possibility that Snape is still a Death Eater and was weakening Harry's mind for infiltration by Voldemort (which is what ended up happening anyway). There was absolutely no conflict or mystery about it. Yates ignored it completely.

  • July 11, 2011, 9:43 a.m. CST

    re: "Trolling like a dick"

    by jim

    That needs to be on a T-Shirt

  • July 11, 2011, 9:49 a.m. CST

    Deathly Hallows PT1 didnt have any big moments

    by drunkenmonkey73

    And the ending was cheesey as hell I'm sure part to will be fantastic how couldnt it be all Yates has to do is follow the book. You need that "I am your father Luke" or the ride of the Rohirrim moment Yates or you will have failed. And it is right there in the Book.

  • July 11, 2011, 9:49 a.m. CST

    I think genderblender is Beaks in disguise.

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Fuckin' wit' y'all.

  • July 11, 2011, 9:55 a.m. CST

    To: the_choppah

    by seagrass

    That would be a valid argument, except for this simple fact: It wouldn't have mattered if any other wizard had wanted (or tried) to kill Voldemort, because he would have survived thanks to all of the horcruxes he made. If he had been attacked, he would have survived, and then killed his would-be assassin. Anyone else would think that he was so powerful, he couldn't even be killed. Voldemort also made the horcruxes secretly, so who (aside from a select few) actually knew about them? And even if they knew, how would they have gone about finding them all and destroying them? Harry and Co. only did it with a lot of help and some dumb luck.

  • July 11, 2011, 9:58 a.m. CST

    Choppah

    by D.Vader

    I am sure there were some Death Eaters who began to doubt Voldemort after he failed to kill Harry (but then again, this is a leader who came back from fucking DEATH- that would make a believer out of anyone), but those witches and wizards would have been too terrified to do anything about it. Like Orcs who disagreed with fighting for Sauron or believed they were gonna lose; what else are they gonna do? They've been screwed into service.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:09 a.m. CST

    what an absolutely stupid series

    by abe

    Glad she hasn't gotten or stolen single dime from me. I wouldn't even let my dog see that crap.

  • A Song of Ice and Fire people. Read it. Don't know how many kids will be camping out tonight but I'm sure having 5 of the top ten NY times bestselling books this week will garner some attention.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:42 a.m. CST

    Did Skycrapper read Harry Potter?

    by D.Vader

    People... actually die in that one too.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:50 a.m. CST

    Captain America

    by proevad

    I can't wait to gloat when this thing bombs. Who was this movie made for? I don't know one teenage kid or young adult who is excited about this movie. Overly patriotic middle aged fat guys who jerk off to 50 year old comic books--do not a big demographic make. Not to mention, the overseas ticket sales are going to be laughably bad. Stupid investment.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:50 a.m. CST

    Yes I did and I can tell you exactly who dies in Harry Potter

    by skycrapper

    Ice and Fire wouldn't be afraid to touch the main three.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:53 a.m. CST

    skycrapper: The death toll in Harry Potter was pretty high

    by seagrass

    although it did take until the last few books or so for it to get going. Also, keep in mind that these are children's books, so a comparison with the A Song of Ice and Fire series (which is definitely not for children) is rather unfair. Harry Potter is loved by both adults and kids (many who grew up with the books), and even though there are undoubtedly some mature youngsters reading Martin's novels (I was reading Stephen King when I was 5), the crossover potential is not anywhere near what happened with the Potter series.

  • My memory of the books is vague, but I think it's either late in five or in six. Correct me if I'm wrong. Horcruxes are the ultimate retcon.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:02 a.m. CST

    More about the horcruxes.

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    The concept rang falsely for me toward the end of the series. They were more about padding out the story and making more money than serving the story. Maybe, like skycrapper, I'm spoiled by Ice and Fire. Martin is no Tolkien, but he's got some real storytelling balls.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:02 a.m. CST

    Re: the main three

    by seagrass

    Technically, Harry *did* die. The whole series was leading up to it. If it weren't for the fact that Harry had been a horcrux, he would have died for his friends. He had a choice to "move on" or return. He chose the latter. Also, I would argue that there were more than three main characters. Snape, Dumbledore and Sirius were more important (in my eyes) than Ron or Hermoine, and Rowling had no problem killing them - rather unexpectedly, I might add. Speaking of Harry as a horcrux, I *loved* the look Dumbledore gave Harry in Half Blood Prince (the film) when he tells him that he "may have found another (horcrux)". Great acting by Gambon, and very easy to miss the subtle hint that Harry is himself a horcrux.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:03 a.m. CST

    Horcruxes are mentioned in part 6

    by D.Vader

    If Horcruxes are a retcon (which is doubtful bc Rowling must have had an idea of how Voldemort would return all along), then its a retcon that worked *perfectly*.

  • I keep having to remind myself that the HP books are more for kids and tweens, even if they can be enjoyable for adults.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:06 a.m. CST

    You know how I celebrate mediocrity?

    by skycrapper

    I read Gendblender posts.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:09 a.m. CST

    the_choppah

    by seagrass

    I have to disagree. There had to be a good explanation for why Voldemort was able to return from the dead (which happens in the first book, mind you), and I'd say that Rowling had the answer planned out quite well. Throughout the series, she dropped plenty of subtle (and obvious) hints that there was something funny going on with Voldemort and his return.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:10 a.m. CST

    Dumbledore...

    by TheWacoKid

    With all due respect to Michael Gambon, Richard Harris was the absolute perfect Dumbledore. The movies are definitly still classic films, and will always be. (No matter what anyone says) But the loss of Richard Harris dropped my love for the films just a little bit. Harris was insanely better at being the "father figure" for Harry then Michael Gambon. Michael Gambon always seems to come across as disinterested and mean for the most part. Here's hoping he proves me wrong in the last movie...(Spoiler, Dumbledore returns for a little bit in the last movie)

  • July 11, 2011, 11:14 a.m. CST

    And don't get me wrong I do like Harry Potter

    by skycrapper

    I think the world building there is fascinating and I will be there seeing the movie this weekend. However if those "kids" who are now 20 somethings now are looking for something just as good or better (IMO) it's out there in Ice and Fire.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:15 a.m. CST

    Also

    by seagrass

    There was no real reason (storywise) for Rowling to reveal early on how Voldemort was able to survive. If she had, we would have had several books of horcrux hunting, and that feeling of desperation that the heroes had in the final books would have been lost. It was a great mystery, not to mention the final revelation that Voldemort and his arrogance were once again the cause of his own demise.

  • Fuck if I know. Why do I really care? I just have trouble with extended stories that keep folding back on itself to explain shit that seemed perfectly cool and interesting the first time around: 'Oh, THAT's why that happened! Makes sense now .. I guess.' Isn't it enough that Voldemort's spirit was so evil that it just survived in some twisted form out in the wilderness or some spirit world or some shit? It's a story about wizards and monsters, so I'm pretty well prepared to suspend my disbelief about what exactly happened. But then these horcruxes come along, and the plot becomes tantamount to a video game quest. Collect all the pieces and beat the bad guy and all that.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:17 a.m. CST

    Yates lost me

    by Shaner Jedi

    really, the films he did from the books all have this dull drabby look to them. I liked the first 3 HP films but lost interest pretty quickly after that.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:18 a.m. CST

    Dumblecore

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Ironically amateurish hipster films about, like, magic and shit.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:19 a.m. CST

    thewacokid

    by seagrass

    I liked Harris, but Gambon did indeed make the part his own, and after reading all of the novels, I'd say that Gambon ended up fitting the part better than Harris did (but we'll never know!). Also, I don't think Rowling meant for Dumbledore to be the true father figure for Harry; instead, Sirus played that part. Dumbledore did all of the string pulling behind the scenes, and Gambon really embodies this particular trait of Dumbledore's.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:20 a.m. CST

    skycrapper, as a fellow Ice and Fire fan, I must say

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    that A Feast for Crows left a bitter taste in my mouth. I hope Dance with Dragons gets shit back on fucking track.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:30 a.m. CST

    The choppah

    by D.Vader

    But then if Voldemort survives because his spirit is just "so evil" it can't be defeated... ... Uh, just how the fuck do you defeat it?

  • July 11, 2011, 11:32 a.m. CST

    complainers/horcrux/death (long post)

    by vicmackey1268

    1) If you complain about the movies and haven't read the book you were like me last year, thinking the movies were entertaining but not great and missed why people saw their appeal...Books 3+ have very adult themes to them and while they aren't as Adult as Ice and Fire, its in its own category...you can't just say both are fantasy so both can be compared, I would never let my kids read Ice and Fire. Also, while those books are good, the author has taken forever to finish the latest book and the majority of fans weren't as pleased with Feast for Crows. The guy is also old and has health problems so if he lives to actually finish his series we can talk, but no HP book fan has a problem with any of the novels other than a few thought the "walking in the woods" and "epilogue" in book 7 were boring/lame. 2) I agree with everyone who said horcrux is mentioned first in Book 6, and explained better...for those of you who thought it was a made up plot device to be able to close out the story, they are not. In the beginning of 5 the locket is mentioned, 4 has harry reacting to touching the ring in a way that shocks Dumbledore (leaves traces), and 4 also shows Dumbledore's wand markings that become a very important plot device. 3) Death is in 1 when we learn Harry's parents were slaughtered with other people, 2 goes into more detail and deals with the murders of "unpure blood" people as well as attempts to kill a bunch of students and shows two students at the end, one slowly dying, the other being stabbed and facing poison. 3 has a very long exposition of the torture and death of more wizards as well as creatures who suck out people's souls. 4 has the first visual death shown to the reader in the form of a friend and student being murdered as well as several "close calls" as well as limbs being cut off. 5 has numerous deaths and EVERY main character is in critical condition at the end, something the movie decided to change. 6 shows the torture and death of one of the most loved characters and 7, well, I won't spoil it but theres TONS of characters readers grew to appreciate who die for Harry....just because Ice and Fire have more deaths/sudden deaths you also have to realize its told on a grand scale in multiple cities around a world where everyone backstabs everyone else....Harry Potter only really has 2 backstabbers and both cause plenty of torture-related horrible deaths.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:33 a.m. CST

    Wow some of you are really bitter

    by Andrew Coleman

    Reading some of these comments it's just clear some of you don't even really believe what you're saying. Like you're not edgy or "cool" for just blindly disliking Harry Potter. I mean it's rather clear most of you don't have much of a social life. It's like you guys wait to see nerdy people respond to something... Then you blindly hate on it. Watch when Captain America comes out... So far has got a fair treatment in the TB's. It opens and some people will like it... You people will flutter in here "It sucks!" "I should have know the Rocketeer guy would fuck it up!"... Blah blah blah. These boards used to be for movie lovers and nerds. Now it's filled with bitter fucking assholes who look back and want their childhood back or something. Sorry you don't have anyone to go see Deathly Hollows with but don't bring your self loathing nonsense here. It's boring. Now for people who actually have reviews and dislikes it's all good. Opinions are opinions. It's rather clear though who actually just doesn't like the movies or books and the people who are trying to hate on it, simply because other people like it.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:34 a.m. CST

    d.vader

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Good point. But, then, it is a magical world and contrivance is coin. Surely she could have come up with some super secret magical thing that wouldn't have taken 2,000 pages to solve.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:36 a.m. CST

    the_choppah

    by seagrass

    Voldemort returned in the very first novel. He had to exist in that twisted form *because* of the horcruxes he had created. I don't have any problem with Rowling giving us a good explanation for that. He also is stuck in that form after he dies for good, again, because of the horcruxes. Ironically, if Voldemort had chosen to remain in his parasitic form instead of using Harry's blood to come back to full power, he probably never could have been killed for good. He was able to do plenty of damage before he came back. Like I said, his own arrogance led to his downfall. The horcruxes also give us some insight into Voldemort's character. He was so afraid of dying that he would do anything to keep it from happening to him. The horcruxes worked, but at a pretty big price, hence his desire to be "Master of Death" with the Elder Wand. The only main complaint I would have with the Potter series is that we never explicitly find out why Voldemort becomes so evil, although the whole "fear of dying" thing he had was definitely a factor. We never see his childhood and what happened with his parents, but like you said, Choppah - maybe he was just evil.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:37 a.m. CST

    seagrass

    by TheWacoKid

    I can see that Sirius was supposed to more of the father figure. That does make a lot of sense. Richard Harris was exactly what I imagined Dumbledore to be, Michael Gamdon wasn't. I think that's why it just took something away from the movie for me. I still think he's great, but not perfect for me, if that makes sense. Also, I can't shake him as the evil toy company owner in that awful Robin WIlliams movie "Toys". Don't ask me why... Speaking of Dumbledore, I still don't understand why they did not include Dumbledore's funeral in Harry Potter 6. That was the most emotional part of the series besides the end of 7 for me and a lot of people I know. That is really the only part of the books I wished was in the movies. All the other cuts I understood.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:40 a.m. CST

    dkent, nice list

    by Dekutree41

    I agree with most of your reviews, but I think Goblet did have its own sort of artistry. I was just watching it last night and it struck me that this is the most bizarro of all the films. I remember one critic comparing it to a Bollywood film and that's about right. The French girls doing that weird breathing thing and that tall chick and Hagrid grabbing her ass while dancing. There's some demented imagery in that movie. Also, Luna Lovegood and Dolores Umbridge go a long way toward saving Phoenix. They're the reasons it doesn't completely underwhelm. I like the last act too...but yeah, it's super disjointed and filled with clunky transitions and something like a hundred montages to mark the passage of time. Also a super boring score. This was a director finding his voice...Part Six was a huge improvement. That last bit when Dumbledore and Harry went out to get that underwater whatever was full on LOTR. Also - so Voldemort posts on this site under the name Genderblender?

  • July 11, 2011, 11:42 a.m. CST

    vicmackey1268

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Yeah, Martin pisses me off by taking forever, but I think he wants to get it right, particularly after the comparatively dull and incomplete A Feast for Crows. Rowling deserves credit for staying focused and on track, having an end in mind. But there are too many rules and shit to explain at the very end to make it all lock into place. It's a little too neat. Again, that's because of the target audience, so I'm not going to hold it too much against the work. It's just not really for me, and, frankly, if I had a chance to do it all over again, I'd probably pass. I'm happy for HP fans, though. They seem satisfied by most of this stuff. It's when they grow up to be insufferable nostalgia zombies that I'm going to get a headache.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:46 a.m. CST

    seagrass

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Book six did a very nice job of humanizing Voldemort, something Yates totally fucking fumbled in the film. Rowling tied his fear of death pretty well to the horcruxes, which, otherwise, strike me as a pretty transparent retcon. Maybe she had a loose idea of how to keep Voldemort alive in the first few books, but then this horcrux thing shows up fully realized and the mission to destroy them all ends up feeling like a chore as a result.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:46 a.m. CST

    Choppa

    by skycrapper

    Well considering the reviews it's getting it seems like Martin's back on track. I happen to like A Feast For Crows but I can't blame anyone for not liking what he did with that book. If you've remained spoiler free all the better. There are some "game changers" coming.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:48 a.m. CST

    OoTP and HBP were horrible books

    by i_got_worms

    Even Rowling admits she could have lost a hundred pages from phoenix.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:49 a.m. CST

    The Choppah

    by D.Vader

    Oh you mean some sort of Deus Ex Machina magic weapon like The Ultimate Nullifier? But then the elements of Voldemort's destruction would not have come from his own hand, which is the point of the whole affair: Voldemort was his own downfall; his decisions, his choices.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:49 a.m. CST

    wacokid

    by seagrass

    Yeah, I agree with you on the funeral. It would have been an excellent ending to the film. I wonder if it was indeed shot (or at least storyboarded) and cut for time. As for Gambon/Harris: in a world where Richard Harris had survived, he would have ended up being the perfect Dumbledore for the entire series. I don't think anyone would argue that (not even Gambon!) That being said, what are the odds that someone like Harris would have stuck around for all of the films? He almost turned down the part in the first place, because he was afraid that he would only be remembered for playing Dumbledore. I have a feeling that while Harris might have returned for a third film, coming back for FIVE more would probably been out of the question. Again, we'll never know.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:51 a.m. CST

    thewacokid...

    by vicmackey1268

    I loved Richard Harris as well, but he moved soooo slow that when I saw 5 and how Dumbledore moved around I was glad that Harris wasn't in it cuz if he had lived that long he surely would've died of a heart attack trying to be that active. On a different note though, I always thought 4 showed him moving too much...the whole "eternal glory" scene has was waving his arms around and it was like how people move in a stage play rather than a movie. 5 and 6 he kicked ass though and I loved the serious/emotional scenes he did. As for the cuts...I of course let most of them go but the explaination of ghosts appearing to Harry in 4 was done better in books, 5's ending was way different since all of the characters suffer severe injuries, 6's beginning was totally changed, the multiple flashbacks were needed, and I agree the funeral was very important, as was the character development of Tonks and he relationship with Lupin as well as the MUCH greater depth the older Weasly brothers have in the books...no one just watching the movies knows about Lupin/Tonks and how he was bit by Greyback. LOtR fans flocked to spend $ to see their extended trilogy in theaters, making each movie over 3 hours...HP fans would have done the same to see these If only Grindhouse wasn't made we'd have a longer HP5 (it bombed and the Studio blamed it on the audience not wanting to see a 3 hour movie, even tho Grindhouse was really two) 4 was supposed to start the dual-movie transition but Mike Newell asked Alfonso for help in shortening it to 1 movie and I think they did a remarkable job cutting out the confusing aspects of the book while keeping everything important in...my opinion, Mike Newell should've done 5 as well.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:55 a.m. CST

    d.vader

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Then the series should be called 'Voldemort.' Harry Potter himself is rendered pretty useless by that reading, which I happen to agree with. Harry, for all the valor he shows, is pretty much just a pawn in the destruction of Voldemort. Mommy's love saves him, or some spirits save him, or Dumbledore finally explains to him what's what in that dream/fade world, etc. etc. Voldemort is loads more interesting as a character, so I'm more invested in his destruction than Harry's victory, which is probably why I'm not so invested in this series.

  • July 11, 2011, 11:58 a.m. CST

    Count me as a Gambon fan.

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Harris was terrific in the first two movies, but Gambon could have pulled it off, too. I think that his Dumbledore is a little more blustery and authoritative.

  • You fail at using literally.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:02 p.m. CST

    Choppah

    by seagrass

    I wouldn't say that Yates fumbled it - you can lay the blame for that on Kloves. That film could probably have been split into two as well (and I believe was even considered at one point). Yates nailed Deathly Hallows part 1, and I'm hoping he'll stick the landing. Yates gets some unfair treatment around here, but I think he's right up there with CuarĂ³n in terms of how he handled Potter. The Ministry of Magic sequence in Phoenix is still one of my favorites from the entire series. I can't wait to see what Yates does next.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:03 p.m. CST

    changes...

    by vicmackey1268

    I think the biggest problem i have with the differences between the books and movies are some of the tiny changes that really didn't matter....like in book 1, Hermoine uses fire to ignite Snapes robe, which reminds her later to use it against devil's snare....but in the movie she says a poem and uses a different spell....like the screenwriters were like "naw, lets not use the book and we'll make up our own thing!".....it happens in every movie in 5 Harry memorizes the location of the Order's hideout and opens it, in the movie, Mad Eye smacks his stick on the ground...its just upsetting to me that writers changed things just for the hell of it. I could see condensing things for time constraints, but not altering things that didn't need to be messed with.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:05 p.m. CST

    Extended cuts

    by seagrass

    You really have to wonder just how much was shot and left out (or purposely held back). I'm sure we'll get a massive box set of extended editions, as WB will want to milk Potter for all it's worth.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:07 p.m. CST

    Choppah

    by D.Vader

    Harry Potter is instrumental in defeating Voldemort bc Voldemort made Harry part of the equation. There was nothing special about Harry until Voldemort made him special in an attempt to circumvent death.

  • It does work in terms of the overall plot fitting into place. My main problem with it is that it feels like plot padding, and the quest itself to destroy the horcruxes isn't all that interesting.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:08 p.m. CST

    arkhaminmate001

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    Kindly show yourself out, then.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:11 p.m. CST

    vicmackey

    by seagrass

    Obviously we all want to see the little things, but it's a hell of a lot cooler (and faster) to see Mad Eye do that then to have to go through the exposition needed to have Harry memorize something onscreen. It works in the books, but would have been rather dull in the movie. I don't think the little changes really hurt (and we didn't get enough Mad Eye as it was!). Deathly Hallows part one stayed faithful to that, though... Moody's death in the film was exactly as it was in the books. You didn't see it happen in either one, and it was even explained away in the same manner. You could view it as a misstep by Rowling, but we didn't really need to see a Mad Eye/Voldemort battle. Mad Eye was tough, but Voldemort was better. End of story.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:11 p.m. CST

    That's a good point Choppah

    by skycrapper

    Voldemort as a character is definitely more interesting than Harry. Although I did like how Rowlings had Harry just kind of thrust into this magic world because he was raised by non-magical people. But once the discovery aspect of the story wore off he's kind of a bland dude.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:14 p.m. CST

    Weird, Choppah

    by D.Vader

    Because I felt the quest to find and destroy the Horcruxes was most interesting. Its the 4th quarter and they're down, and now they've got to A) find objects they don't know about B) they don't know where they are and C) they don't know how to destroy them. How the fuck are they gonna do it?! And in one book? That was very intriguing.

  • Especially that last one, holy BALLS was that fucking lame-o!

  • July 11, 2011, 12:17 p.m. CST

    choppah...

    by vicmackey1268

    1st of all, I've read most of your posts, especially ones in other chats for other movies and I have to say you can be quite mean to other people, so i thank you for your response to my post since it was just you disagreeing politely...i appreciate that in a room filled with people who love throwing around profanity for no reason. 2nd...In the very opening of Book 1 the wizards are mindboggled at how he survived and his popularity is so great even before he knows who he is cuz NO one knows how a little baby "killed" the dark lord....while charaters like Hagrid explain that some think Voldamort died, he thinks he's still out there too weak to continue...which is why so many are shocked to hear about things that have happened in the past, reoccurring now. Simple put, the horcrux plot device was, your right, not brought up until the 2nd half of the novels, however, every character is so confused at everything, especially regarding Harry that the plotline would've gotten tedious unless it changed.... 3 starts Dumbledore being more acceptive to Harry's position, and the entire point of the conflict between Harry and Dumbledore in 5 was because Dumbledore was gone and "ignoring" Harry trying to do all the searching and fact-finding himself...even in the movies you see Harry touch the ring and he has an intense reaction to it that visibly freaks the crap out of Dumbledore.....the horcrux part wouldn't even be in the books as prominent as it was if Dumbledore hadn't been killed since he was off searching/figuring them out for a while. What the movies fail to show is the intense chase that happens between Harry and Vold...in fact, theres a very important part where Harry decides to actually forget going for the Horcrux because racing Vold to the elder wand is more important....obviously the movie skips all that and we see who wins at the end but the book makes everything be a race and a very thrilling one at that. sorry my post is really long...again...next time I'll do better.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:17 p.m. CST

    CHOPPAH

    by BlackBauer0320

    d.vader beat me to it but yeah, you're actually right in your analysis of Harry. He pretty much is a pawn, and was made so by Voldemort himself (who elected to attack him instead of a certain other character). Harry's importance is completely dictated by Voldemort's choices. But while I do find Voldemort more fascinating, I don't think you can discount the idea that Harry never backed down from the responsibility that was put onto him without choice.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:19 p.m. CST

    vicmackey1268

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    I only CHOP those who deserve it. It's a dirty job, but someone's gotta do it. THAT SAID, I appreciate your thoughtful response.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:35 p.m. CST

    @myphdisdoom

    by SobchakSecurity

    "Reading some of these comments it's just clear some of you don't even really believe what you're saying. Like you're not edgy or "cool" for just blindly disliking Harry Potter. I mean it's rather clear most of you don't have much of a social life. It's like you guys wait to see nerdy people respond to something... Then you blindly hate on it. Watch when Captain America comes out... So far has got a fair treatment in the TB's. It opens and some people will like it... You people will flutter in here "It sucks!" "I should have know the Rocketeer guy would fuck it up!"... Blah blah blah. These boards used to be for movie lovers and nerds. Now it's filled with bitter fucking assholes who look back and want their childhood back or something. Sorry you don't have anyone to go see Deathly Hollows with but don't bring your self loathing nonsense here. It's boring. Now for people who actually have reviews and dislikes it's all good. Opinions are opinions. It's rather clear though who actually just doesn't like the movies or books and the people who are trying to hate on it, simply because other people like it. " Uh, no. I know I'm not bitter at all, and I'm guessing others aren't either. Least that's the impression I get. I really don't hate Harry Potter the character(s), storie(s), or series. I mean, it's a well done succesful fantasy/action series and I really am glad for the success of all those who have been involved and benefitted from it. It's the fans/nerds of the series that tend to get to me. Simply put, it's another succesful fantasy/action series where it's merely not enough for those who are fans of it to simply enjoy it. No,no,no,no. You have to take it and turn it into a movement where you call those who aren't fans or simply don't care either way "muggles". That's why I will be so gleefully delighted when Captain America kicks Potters wand waving wizard ass. Also, I don't blindly love or hate anything. I love it,kinda like it, don't care either way, totally fucking hate it, cause I do. Not cause of what others say. Don't get it twisted. "You people will flutter in here "It sucks!" "I should have know the Rocketeer guy would fuck it up!"... Blah blah blah. These boards used to be for movie lovers and nerds. " As for that part,I agree. Fanboy puristism is bad. But has the Potter series not had the same sort of criticisms lobbed on it as well? Just saying. And yes, Captain America is going to kick Potters ass.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:35 p.m. CST

    pawn/seagrass

    by vicmackey1268

    Yes, Harry is a pawn, but all chess players know that getting rid of pawns early on is a horrible mistake...in fact, pawns are what a lot of the gameplay revolves around and in the best games, pawns are the ones responsible for ensuring the checkmate. I'm going to say something that will probably give me shit later.....Voldamort is to HP what Jigsaw is the Saw series....he's the most interesting (other than Snape imo, he's my favorite, mostly cuz of Alan Rickman), barely in the first 1 other than through stories, every book/movie after 1 is responsible for telling more backstory on him, and all have plot points that emerge to serve the purpose of ending the story....however....and this is where i will get the most heat.....I think that's the best part... I really DONT care if Harry kisses Cho or hooks up with Ginny or of a twin dies blah blah blah...I care about learning as much as I can about the bad guy AS the main character is learning about him...each tidbit IS far more interesting than the other plot points and is what drives the story. I liked SAW for it's depth into Jigsaw and I like HP for its depth into discovering the link between a child and a horrible mass murderer.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:43 p.m. CST

    Can't we ALL agree Twilight sucks

    by proevad

    Time to come together brothers and sisters. Let's share some love.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:43 p.m. CST

    Potter/Capt America

    by vicmackey1268

    Potter fans will be the only ones seeing this movie... other than that, both films share the same fan appreciation since there are millions who "grew up" with these....I know several people (my neighbor included) who remembered the first Capt America and how it made him feel better fighting overseas thinking there was a superhero back at home his kids could read about. Potter fans similar in that they had their own post-pog, post-tomogatchi, post-pokemon movement where they got to call something their own. Harry Potter fans who started reading back in 7th grade are now 23/24 and can still be "kids", even re-reading the books they grew up with. So, while I think Capt America has a broader age-range, I think HP will for sure get more money, if not in America, for sure in world gross...HP in Europe will slaughter any movie focused on an American hero, similar to how League of Extraordinary Gentleman bombed here, we all hated it, but it made a fortune overseas. I shall be seeing both lol.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:45 p.m. CST

    You could argue that the entire Potter series

    by seagrass

    is just one big game of Wizard's Chess between Dumbledore and Voldemort. In the end, Dumbledore (the Queen, HA!) sacrifices himself to save the King (Harry).

  • July 11, 2011, 12:49 p.m. CST

    Re: Twilight

    by seagrass

    I've never seen any of the films. However, I can look at a Twilight poster and apply the following reasoning: The nice thing about shit is this - you don't have to smell shit or touch shit or experience shit to know that it's shit. All you've gotta do is have a single glance at shit and then you know. The same thing applies to douchebags.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:52 p.m. CST

    proevad

    by vicmackey1268

    ...1) Yes ...2) Im pretty sure the vast majority of people that fall into the "hater" category here are all Twilight fans who bang Edward in their dreams...even if they won't admit it...actually...I'm gonna put it out there right now and say whoever now says "Um, harry potter f-in sucks and i hate twilight" is a closet case and is most likely wearing fake vampire teeth. ...3) if you have a personal opinion like "idk, I just never got into it" or "meh its not really my kind of genre"...you are excluded from the above statement. ....4) All those who hate the films cuz of the director/writer and liked the books are partially excluded but as I said before I stand by my argument that the movies serve as compliments to the books, not substitutes, as they leave out descriptions and explainations that are important.

  • July 11, 2011, 12:57 p.m. CST

    Expecto Patronum!!!!!!!!!

    by SenatorJeffersonSmith

    Cuaron's Prisoner of Azkaban is the best Potter film. First two movies are boring as hell.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:27 p.m. CST

    I was inicially quite skeptical about the Harry Potter saga.

    by AsimovLives

    It didn't helped that for some reason WB decided to use it to compete against LOTR. But after the whole LOTR movies had run their course, and before the 3rd had been released in the theaters, i decided to give the movies a go. I saw the fist two HP movies in one go, the day before i went to see the 3rd in the theater. And i liked them. I was underwhlemed by Chris columbus polaroid style of directing, but the stories and the characters were engaging. The 3rd movie was directed with great aplomp and style and intelligence by Alfonso Cuaron and it helped make me like this series quite a lot. and contrary to the geekheads, there's no movie of this saga since the 3rd that has disapointed me so far. Also, for those who think that Daneil Radcliff doesn't do a good job at the role, go get stuffed. Really, get stuffed! If you can't recognize good acting when you see it, chose a different hobby then movies. Like quilting or something like that.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:33 p.m. CST

    Daniel Radcliff

    by vicmackey1268

    is just fine as Harry Potter..sure he gets made fun of, but that's by losers that only wish they were millionaires by 20 Every movie had its bad actor...of course 1 isn't included cuz they were all so tiny and cute and awwwwww but starting in 3 (daniel's lip quiver in the snow), 4 (Hermoine's lines during the age-line scene), 5 (ok so everytime Emma Watson talked her eyebrows went crazy)...6 and 7, especially 7, showed the characters acting instead of reacting and it was great...I, for one, enjoyed both movies since they did move slower...it really gave me the opportunities to see just how much they've grown (literal and metaphor)

  • July 11, 2011, 1:35 p.m. CST

    All the kids including Radcliffe

    by proevad

    were really stiff in the first two movies. Dan has had a few bad moments here and there along the way, but he is an old pro at it now. Thought he was terrific in the last one especially. Growing up around the best actors on the planet has to rub off. Even if he didn't have natural talent (which I don't think he did), he's got it now thanks to them.

  • July 11, 2011, 1:36 p.m. CST

    The First Two Movies...

    by TheWacoKid

    I didn't know there was so much hate for these movies. I didn't have a problem with either of them. Just like was said, Columbus had the most difficult job of all the directors, which was casting, and introduction of the world not only to the people who read the books, but for everyone else. I think he did a fantastic job. I watched the first one again recently, and it was wonderful the way introduced everything, as well as bring the plot in. He had to introduce an incredible amount of characters, and magical things (quidditch, money, goblins, owl mail, etc.) in 1 movie, then follow it up with more in the second, as well as have a major plot in both movies. The list can go on and on. I think he and Kloves, did an incredible job introducing the magical world. The rest of the directors did not have to introduce as much, as well as cast major cast members in the process. Not to say they didn't do a good job either, but Columbus had the much harder task.

  • July 11, 2011, 2:47 p.m. CST

    GenderBlender, you are so,so wrong....

    by SobchakSecurity

    Weird name too. Says alot about you. Anyways. You are so wrong in that Captain America is going to fail. We can allready tell it's going to be one of if not the best of the year. Captain America, unlike Potter, has that broader appeals to everyone unlike Potter, which only seems to appeal to Potter fans. Yes. There is/can be a difference. Everyone seems to be more excited over Captain America than Potter, so that alone says alot. "And I will be right in front to watch the shocked and disappointed fangeeks yet again get one more comeuppance reminding them how much the world loathes what they like." Hmm, the same could be said for Potter fans as well in similar enough ways.

  • July 11, 2011, 2:49 p.m. CST

    Also and for the record.....

    by SobchakSecurity

    I don't Harry Potter, the books,movies, series as a whole. It just wasn't my thing, but I can, and do, respect it as a succesul action/fantasy series, there just happens to be other franchises I like more. I just like ripping on the Potter nerd/fanbase. It's just amusing to me to see them spaz out. Kind of payback in a way.

  • July 11, 2011, 3:47 p.m. CST

    Shove your poncy Potter books up yer arse Rowling!

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    How Nordling can mention Harry sodding Potter in the same breath as Empire Strikes back and Return of the King I don't know. The whole Potter phenomenon is so fuckin girlie it's unbelievable. There's no fuckin balls to it at all. If one of my kids ever gets into Harry poncy Potter...........I'm fuckin leavin. I want my son to like something at least a bit manly.......not some hurray Henry's and Henrietta kids with bloody wands.

  • July 11, 2011, 3:50 p.m. CST

    lordoflight

    by proevad

    You're a homosexual. There are many others like you. You don't have to be afraid or alone any more. It's 2011. Luvya lil buddy.

  • July 11, 2011, 3:53 p.m. CST

    Enid Blyton wrote better kids books than Rowling.

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    And Roald Dahl too. They had much better and bigger imaginations than that suspected plagiariser Rowling (who's admitted she saw the film where she might have got her character from). She's a stupid one trick pony who got where she is because of hype. Don't tell me those stupid Potter books have any depth or meaning to them. They're for fuckin 6 year olds.

  • July 11, 2011, 3:54 p.m. CST

    I'm sorry, sobchak, but you're wrong.

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    CAP will do well, despite what Queen Troll Genderblender (whom I suspect to be Beaks) says, but it's not going to beat HARRY POTTER at the box office. You say it only appeals to 'Potter fans.' Where have you been the past 15 years? Potter fandom is the very definition of broad appeal, from kids to the elderly. The lowest-grossing Potter movie, AZKABAN, made $795 million worldwide. The last three Potter movies each made over $900 million globally, and one of them was only HALF a fukkin' movie! This is the last film in an immensely popular film series, which is part of the kind of cultural phenomenon that only occurs maybe once or twice a generation. This movie will clear $1 billion by itself. But you think that CAPTAIN AMERICA, which, no matter how good it may turn out to be (I have high hopes for it myself), is essentially a warm-up film for THE AVENGERS, is going to do better business? CAPTAIN AMERICA, whose very name excludes much of the rest of the world, is going to be outpace the final HARRY POTTER film? What?

  • July 11, 2011, 3:55 p.m. CST

    And I don't even particularly care for the Potter series.

    by THE_CHOPPAH

    It's just plain as day that in no way can CAPTAIN AMERICA top it, financially speaking.

  • July 11, 2011, 4:04 p.m. CST

    Nice try proevad!

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    Please don't tell me you like this poncy Potter shit too? If you're male and over the age of 12 then at least read something that isn't aimed at young girls.

  • ...J. K. Rowling raped my childhood!!!

  • July 11, 2011, 4:24 p.m. CST

    Ty man

    by proevad

    All about the love, no matter where it goes in. Seriously though--that would be a yes to your question. I love Elmore Leonard books too though, so go figure.

  • But you are in a distinct minority on this particular website.

  • July 11, 2011, 4:38 p.m. CST

    Holm / McKellen, yes. Patrick Stewart would have fit well in here too.

    by GreatWhiteNoise

    Other than them (and possibly Anthony Hopkins), they've included practically every top-drawer British thespian to come down the pike in quite some time.

  • July 11, 2011, 4:45 p.m. CST

    Lucas fucked the prequels but at least they have a bit of balls.

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    Lucas might have made a horse's arse of the prequels and given us those Ewoks.........but at least males over the age of 12 can hold their heads a bit high when they say they like Star Wars. If you're a male over 12 who says they like Potter then don't be surprised if people laugh at you behind your back.

  • July 11, 2011, 4:48 p.m. CST

    Rowling raped my adulthood.

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    Seriously. I'm so fed up with this completely overhyped girlie Harry Potter phenomenon everywhere it has in effect raped my mind.

  • Why don't you fuck off you fucking tool. I like Star Wars AND Harry Potter. Why is it always a fucking pissing contest over this Vs. that. Do I like all of the Star Wars movies? No. Do I like all of the Harry Potter movies? No. But I can explain, in detail, my issues with both series. At least we can all agree that Stargate sucks shit!!!FACT!!!

  • July 11, 2011, 5 p.m. CST

    Yeah but Harry Potter's so WIMPY catchtheman.

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    That's what fuckin baffles me about males over 12 who like it. I'm no hard case.....I'm not some macho tosser........but even I can't abide the whole wimpy Potter phenomenon. Every time I see that smug JK wotserface.....I want to vomit. She thinks she's bloody Shakespeare or something, not a writer of over hyped kiddie books. Even if she's an attractive woman. Attractive......but she still makes me wanna vom.

  • July 11, 2011, 5:17 p.m. CST

    Thank god Holm and McKellen haven't been in Potter.

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    I'd rather them avoid anything Harry Potter like the plague.

  • July 11, 2011, 5:36 p.m. CST

    The last one is basically one long battle

    by MovieGeekBlog

    I quite liked it actually... I even cried once or twice... My review on my blog Moviegeekblog.com

  • July 11, 2011, 5:45 p.m. CST

    Epic battles and Potter = EPIC FAIL!

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    No matter how epic, how bloody they make the so called battles in Harry Potter the films will still be for 6 - 12 year old girls who like dressing up as witches in school. Talk about Rowling getting ideas above her station. You're not writing epics Rowling luvvie.......you're writing kiddie books.

  • July 11, 2011, 5:55 p.m. CST

    @the_choppah

    by SobchakSecurity

    Well, we'll have to wait and see won't we? My money is on Cap, I was also refering to here in America. Not to exclude other countries/people either, I was just discussing domestic box office gross. Even that alone is good enough for me when Cap dethrones Potter. Worldwide? Yes that's different, but one can only hope. When I say Potter fans, I mean fans of the series. Which to me,and maybe this is just me, like I've said, I was never that into it or followed it, just seemed smaller, or not that big a deal to me. My response to the whole thing was always whatever. And yes, this is my juvenile fanboy nerd side that gets excited over titles such as star trek,robocop,terminator,etc, which to me are the bigger better series. Just saying. Also, I imagine that Captain America, while yes, it will eventually tie into avengers, will be it's own thing story wise?, you know? Not as avengers heavy as some of the other more recent ones, iron man 2, thor, so it having a more independent storyline will be an added plus to it.

  • July 11, 2011, 6:16 p.m. CST

    lordoflight you're fucking retarded as fuck

    by Mel

    I havent seen a kid in a HP movie theater since the Prisoner of Azkaban. Don't talk about shit you know nothing about you dumbfuck. Now go stand in line for Captain America or some other gay ass man in tights comic book movie.

  • Richard Harris' Dumbledore was kind of absurd in how "perfect" he was. Harris' Dumbledore was very similiar to the book version, but I consider that to be a lousy version. I like that Gambon's Dumbledore gets irritated and isn't infinitely patient like the book version is.

  • Chris Colombus might just be the king of the 80's. He wrote some great 80's filcks and directed one 20 years later (Sorcerer's Stone). It was a classic as soon as it was released because it had that vintage feeling SOME of us grew up on.

  • I compare it to horror movies. you'll never kill Freddy or Jason. they just keep coming back. However, by JK Rowling inventing the horcux (explaining why Voldemort has NOT been killed yet), it gives you a definitive way to kill him. So while they're dumb, they at least let you know when the bad guy is dead.

  • July 11, 2011, 6:31 p.m. CST

    I guarantee

    by darth_ghidorah85

    Cap will place 2nd in its opening weekend. can't outshine harry potter, especilaly it the last one. this world loves them some white fantasies. speaking of which, out of the hundred characters that pop up, how come only one them is black? and he a minor charcater too. super minor in fact. JK rowling and 1492 trying to keep us brothas out of hollywood for sure!!!

  • You have no idea if Captain America is going to be good. It looks OK from the trailers, but it could be a flaming piece of shit for all you know. And there's a reason it took them this long to do a Captain America movie...just like the Green Lantern. They're getting down to the last few comic book franchises. Captain America isn't popular. No one but you super nerds care. And DH2 will mop the floor with Captain America, by the way. It won't be within $100,000,000...and I'm just talking domestic. Internationally, it will be like a Yankees/Astros World Series.

  • July 11, 2011, 6:43 p.m. CST

    Megan Murray...

    by carlinesque_thinktank

    the porn actress?

  • July 11, 2011, 6:49 p.m. CST

    The new one might be the best Harry Potter film

    by WINONA_RYDERS_PUSSY_JUICE

    (while most of the others were mediocre/good) And Captain America might be pretty good too. Obviously Potter is going to make 300 million and Captain America will make 150 if it's lucky.

  • July 11, 2011, 7:02 p.m. CST

    Been a hell of a journey....

    by Playkins

    7 books, 8 movies in ten years... damn. Can't believe ten years ago I hadn't read any of them or heard of Harry Potter. Wonder if lightning will strike with that kind of power ever again?

  • July 11, 2011, 7:11 p.m. CST

    I'd rather watch Captain America than a poncy, wimpy kids flick mg

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    At least that's got some balls to it. And comic book films don't usually have men in tights either any more. The outfits usually look ok. Now why don't you go and read or watch your girlie-ass wimpfest......effeminately called Harry Potter. Even the name Harry Potter sounds wimpy.

  • July 11, 2011, 7:17 p.m. CST

    Ewww little Hawwy Potter the mummy's boy.

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    Harry fuckin Potter's the very type of kid who'd get the shit kicked out of him here in Britain (not that I'm condoning bullying) but he's what's known as a mummys boy type. If he didn't have his magic he'd be right up shit creek. And his posh, toffee nosed little chums.

  • July 11, 2011, 8:18 p.m. CST

    Who the fuck cares whether more people see Harry Potter.

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    Honestly.....what is this Captain America verses Potter bullshit? Just because more people will see Potter and it will no doubt make more money doesn't mean Harry Potter isn't a girlie kids flick.

  • July 11, 2011, 8:20 p.m. CST

    lordoflight - LOL at you claiming CA has "balls"

    by Mel

    what balls does it have? let's see....normal dork becomes super hero...no one dies....he stops the bad guy in the end. happy ending ensues. how ballsy. oh and constant one-liners throughout just like every other comic book movie. of course then again you havent seen the movie. you know nothing about it other than what youve seen in the trailers - while i know everything about DH2 because of the book you're just a fat fucking nerd who jizzes anytime you see another man wearing tights.

  • July 11, 2011, 8:25 p.m. CST

    How about us Brits swap you Potter for Captain America?

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    We'll have the Captain and you Yanks can take JK fuckin Rowling and that specky eyed cunt and his wand. They've polluted this country for far too long.

  • July 11, 2011, 8:56 p.m. CST

    Did the Village People really do

    by proevad

    the Captain America soundtrack, or was that just some fanboy wishful thinking I was reading about earlier? Need an answer. Someone set them straight please.

  • July 11, 2011, 9:06 p.m. CST

    People love to toss around the word "balls" in this TB

    by Continentalop

    Which seems strange considering you're talking about a superhero movie and a children's fantasy series. "Balls" should be reserved for movies like LA Confidential or The Town, IMO.

  • July 11, 2011, 9:19 p.m. CST

    So Potter never got laid in 8 movies?

    by Onin Solstice

    Seems cruel. Did he at leat make out with anyone. I seem to recall him having a thing for Asian ass. Did that ever work out for him?

  • July 11, 2011, 9:37 p.m. CST

    Potter never tapped the Asian ass

    by proevad

    she was a conniving cunt (but wasn't really her fault--so she says). He gets laid at least once by a little red head (not the boy that hangs with him--his sister. Ahhh best friend sister ass...) sometime off camera at the end of the movie.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:41 p.m. CST

    Dark Knight Rises trailer

    by imaxguyaustin

    Yep, I'll have a Dark Knight Rises trailer on the front of my IMAX print of HP7B. I was so curious about it, I ran it today. Nice.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:43 p.m. CST

    just nice?

    by vicmackey1268

    Dude, its Batman...words like "nice" are not proper ways to describe the first ever viewing of the new trailer. And instead of watching it, you should be leaking it to the fine fellows at aicn for the world to enjoy.

  • July 11, 2011, 10:51 p.m. CST

    Nothing should be compared to the Empire Strikes Back.

    by Yelsaeb

    Don't do it ever again, Nordling. And that goes for the rest of you, too. Don't. Do. It.

  • July 12, 2011, 1:04 a.m. CST

    Ouch

    by WINONA_RYDERS_PUSSY_JUICE

    Green Lantern has only made 33 million overseas(110 domestic so far). While Pirates made like fucking 800 million overseas, haha. $36 is way low though dude. It does kinda just look like a glorified generic action movie, and might do worse than Green Lantern, I agree. I only made it through 1/2 of this video. These movies are completely disposable, I have no desire to revisit any of it.

  • July 12, 2011, 1:06 a.m. CST

    Is it OK now for me to say that I wish I could eat Emma's ass?

    by uberfreak

  • July 12, 2011, 2:19 a.m. CST

    and I bet her balloon knot is so tight I can't fit a pinky in. ^_^

    by uberfreak

  • July 12, 2011, 2:34 a.m. CST

    What Will Radcliff Miss About Making Potter [Pics]

    by WINONA_RYDERS_PUSSY_JUICE

    http://www.i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=61709

  • July 12, 2011, 11:35 a.m. CST

    genderblender, it is time for you to meet some new people

    by jim

    Find someplace new to hang out at, change jobs, move to a new town or city, something. The You Against The Normies mentality you are living with isn't doing you any favours. It's time to expand your horizons and divest yourself of the notion that the world is made up of exclusionary and warring cliques. You may never meet anyone with the exact same tastes as your own; that's ok. You don't need to meet people who are as passionate about your interests as you are; as long as they are respectful it'll work out. That is, as long as you are equally respectful of theirs. It goes both ways. Let go of the hatred you have for the "normies", and let go of the hatred you have of your fellow geeks. As Yoda said, hate leads to suffering. Honestly, you'll be better off without it.

  • July 12, 2011, 12:38 p.m. CST

    Nothing should be compared to ESB...let alone Harry Potter.

    by LORDOFLIGHT

    ESB was a great film (before Lucas went downhill) but for someone to mention a crummy HP flick in the same breath is sacrilage.

  • July 12, 2011, 1:10 p.m. CST

    Thank You Emma Watson...

    by conspiracy

    for providing me years of immoral, debauched, taboo masturbatory pleasure; and here to many more years to cum.

  • July 12, 2011, 1:13 p.m. CST

    Really, genderblender, you're a very sad person

    by oisin5199

    I feel bad for you, especially your rant about love and friends. I'm sorry you've had no one there for you to support you. You must be very lonely. But don't project your issues on the rest of the world. Because your sad world isn't everyone else's reality. Have you considered therapy? (and I'm not saying that as a dig). Because an AICN talkback isn't really the place to go over the details of your rape. Really, the fact that you would share that with strangers who you're already hostile with, is concerning. Are you looking for validation? Someone to agree with you that people are terrible and that isolating yourself is the way to go? (which is ironic, considering this a forum to communicate with the world). Because it really makes me wonder what you hope to get out of posting these rants that are only meant to disparage what other people like. And your whole thing about wanting to geeks to realize how unimportant they are - schadenfrude much? That right there shows some serious issues. Why would anyone who's interested in any of this stuff want a 'comeuppance' for geeks? What does say about you? you're full of self-hatred? And as others have pointed out, your assessment of Harry Potter is completely inaccurate, especially the bit about Voldemort. And the whole point of the Potter character is that he bucks the rules and authority and finds his own solutions. It's a pretty standard heroes' journey tale, so not much original there, but it's certainly not the call for conformity that you describe. I've read and agreed with a certain amount of academic criticism of the books, especially from a feminist perspective. But you do understand the notion of fantasy, right? That it's something to spark our imagination, give us a hope in a cold world, etc. So yeah, family and love is idealized. If you want 'realistic' films that show you the world is out to get you and that men (and women) are evil, go watch a Neil LaBute film. but really, consider why you do this.

  • July 12, 2011, 4:13 p.m. CST

    conspiracy, YOU SAID IT!!!

    by CreepyThinMan

  • Lighten up a little.

  • July 12, 2011, 11:07 p.m. CST

    screw this topic

    by MoffatBabies

    everyone e-mail in and get them to fix the quotes problem in talkback. Cant use 'em in subjects. And when you use them in the body of the message, the whole message is truncated. It's been going on for too long now and it's a BIG bug.