Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - the movie

[Drake Tungsten]

I thought the new Harry Potter movie was the best so far. A few minor quibbles here and there, but they did a great job turning a damn near unadaptable book into a quality film.

I may be biased by the inclusion of Jarvis Cocker in the film, though.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

While this was not the worst Harry Potter to date, I think it was the least satisfying. For non-fans, it must be largely incomprehensible (much like the film of Azkaban). For fans, I think it sacrificed too much of the "world" of the books. I missed the time spent in the classrooms and quarters, and a sense that what's going on is a whole school year. I also missed Snape and malfoy, who are mere blips on the radar in this one. Newell should have followed the suggestion of making it two movies released closely together. This one shortchanged everybody

[Verto]

This is one movie that definitely needs an Extended Version DVD released, with about 30-45 minutes of added footage put into the movie seamlessly, like LotR. All of them should have this. Call it the "I Read the Books So I Want a 4 Hour Movie" Edition.

[FrostyBoy]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove


You mean the "I've sent you, my only begotten Son, to show them the way?" They're getting a little religious, aren't they? IIRC Superman was sent to Earth because Krypton was dying, not because the Earth needed a messiah. Besides, in what way does Superman show the puny earthlings "the way"? Oh yeah...........get super powers and behave yourselves!

I guess just like Harry Potter, you have to understand the story to understand the movie.

Yes, Krypton was dying, but Jor-El could have chosen any number of planets to send his son to. Jor-El purposely chose Earth to send his son to because the people had potential to be great (and also because their primitiveness would give Superman an advantage to survive.)

The only comment I think they got carried away with was the "My only son" bit. There is no need for Jor-El to menton something like that.

And about 'the way', Superman is powerful, but that's not what he means by showing the people 'the way'. People look to Superman with respect, not because of what he CAN do, but because of what he does.

[Sikander]

I enjoyed the film about as much as the others, with the last film being my favorite. I haven't read the books, but the movies are simple enough to follow even so.

[Dis]

I just have to bump this old thread. It's the first HP thread (about the movies) I found.

Yeah I'm now a Harry Potter fan. . I may have made fun of it before, because I thought it would be too kiddie friendly or geeky. But my friend convinced me they were good movies, and lent me all 4 of her DVD's. Though they were fullscreen edition. . I'll have to educate her about the difference between fullscreen and widescreen. Women just don't understand these things. . I figured if a woman liked it, it can't be too geeky.

I just watched all 4 movies in a 2 day span. Now which one do I like the most... I just can't decide. I'd say it's a tie between the first one and the last one. The first one had this innocent kind of charm. And getting introduced to hogwarts for the first time was quite a treat. The last one had better action, but lacked John Williams score and I didn't care for the dance scenes all that much. But it had dragons .

Not to neglect the middle two films. The werewolf in number 3 was pretty cool. And that regular wolf (I guess that's what that was). I just thought it was cool the scene with the wolf dragging ron into the cave, you could see his yellow eyes. And the time travelling thing was cool as well. Also another buautifl scene was Sirious flying off on the flying creature with the full moon sky. Now if only I could see that on widescreen...

And am I the only one who finds Moaning Myrtle kind of hot? . I won't say much for the other girls, they are under age. But they will be hotties when they get to 18.

In fact, I think I may like these movies more than the Lord of the Rings movies. The Lord of the Rings movies never really grabbed me like they should have. I thought they were a bit overrated.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
While this was not the worst Harry Potter to date, I think it was the least satisfying. For non-fans, it must be largely incomprehensible (much like the film of Azkaban). For fans, I think it sacrificed too much of the "world" of the books. I missed the time spent in the classrooms and quarters, and a sense that what's going on is a whole school year. I also missed Snape and malfoy, who are mere blips on the radar in this one. Newell should have followed the suggestion of making it two movies released closely together. This one shortchanged everybody

possibly. I never read any of the books, and knew nothing about Harry Potter until yesterday. But I didn't have too hard a time following the plot. But yeah, I would liked more of Snape- he's my favourite character. Malfoy is kind of annoying, but he serves a purpose.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Welcome to the club Dis . You should read the books, they read fairly easily.

[q=Rufus]Newell should have followed the suggestion of making it two movies released closely together. [/q]

Hells no! That would have sucked ass. FWIW, I agree with Drake. This is probably my favorite movie so far. It was the first one to really get the humor in the books. The 3rd added the lightheartedness to the slavish recitals of the 1st and 2nd, but this one got the humor. Hey you can't fit everything in, I get that, but it got most of the best parts.

[q=Dis]Though they were fullscreen edition. . I'll have to educate her about the difference between fullscreen and widescreen. Women just don't understand these things. [/q]



True about women though. I have to keep telling my best female friend to buy the DVD's in widescreen (she keeps asking "which type is the one you like?", DOH!) because full screen is crap.

And am I the only one who finds Moaning Myrtle kind of hot?

Nope. FWIW, she is also in Bridget Jones' diary (I did say I had a female friend, right? ), where she isn't meant to portray a kid... though still has that kid accent.

But yeah, I would liked more of Snape- he's my favourite character.

You'll see a deal more of him in the next two movies, I'm certain.

[lord of the mark]

Snape: Can anyone tell me what the potion ive just described does?

Hermione: Oh, I know, I know

Snape: Be quiet, silly girl. Do any of you worthless fools know?

Ron:Oh, yeah, my dad told me about how when some discussion at the Ministry was months old, they used this to revive it. Its call the Red Romancer or something.

Snape: I hope your father has a better memory than you do, or the Ministry is in serious danger (laughter). It is of course the Thread Necromancer potion, and it can be used to revive long dead threads. Most Wizards prefer a Create New Thread spell in most circumstances, but for reasons not yet clear, some very odd wizards rely on the Thread Necromancer potion. It should be used with caution, as it can cause serious side effects, similar to a Confundus Charm.

[Imran Siddiqui]

But Dis is a squib .

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Dis
I figured if a woman liked it, it can't be too geeky.

Well, if *that* was the argument that convinced you I could've talked you over years ago. The majority of the adult HP fans I know are women...

LOL@LotM

GoF was a good movie. Not as good as Azkaban IMO, because too much was cut (I would've prefered a single 3-4-hour movie -- if LotR can pull it off, why not HP?), but in every other aspect it was the best one so far.

But anyway, as good as the movies are, the books are 10 times better. Read them!

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Dis
I'll have to educate her about the difference between fullscreen and widescreen. Women just don't understand these things. .

Ah - so it's a "women thing". I have to keep beating it into my wife's head to get the widescreen version of movies. She still doesn't get it.

And just so I'm not completely off topic, the new Dumbledore sucks. Way too energetic for my taste.

I read the book years ago, and just saw the movie. I'd say the film did a good job capturing the story. I had forgotten about SPEW and didn't miss that boring subplot at all. One thing that stuck me was that I won't be letting my kids watch this one for several years (oldest one is eight). I let them watch the other films, but this one went a lot further with gruesome special effects and general creepiness.

Edit: Oh, and I'm finally reading book five thanks to seeing Goblet of Fire.

[Seeker]

"All they need to do now is throw in some demented German author who has an incestuous relationship with his sister."

See, Strangelove, you're missing your true calling...Kraut fiction!!

[Imran Siddiqui]

[q=Stuie]I let them watch the other films, but this one went a lot further with gruesome special effects and general creepiness.[/q]

As is the book (at least with the creapiness) .

GoF (at least the end) is where the HP story turns from a relatively lighthearted good v. evil book into a far darker tale. Non-coincidentally, it is exactly midway of the series (2nd half of Book 4 in a 7 parter)

[Dis]

I may eventually read the books. I'm sure my friend has the books as well. She's a big fan.

Or I could just not be a cheap ass and buy them. Or get them from a library. It's hard to find time to read anymore though.