board77

Saw it today. It wasn’t quite up to PoA IMHO, but still on the same level.

In some ways, Newell did the best that he could be expected to with a very difficult task. The book left him with very little room to move, and if he left out one thing then he would throw the whole story off. As such, I tend to blame most of the film’s flaws on the size of the book. That being said, I thought that the film and many of the characters came across as being too wound-up and agitated. This weakened Lord V I felt – he was too jittery and jumpy.

On the whole, it came across very well. Some of the compressions were masterful, especially the way that the three trial scenes became one. It had PoA’s charm, and humour, and was quite spectacular and cinematic. Definatley a great effort by the cast and crew.

One thing I find interesting about these adaptations is that they narrow down our field of possibilities. Stuff like Rita Skeeter and Winky both seem to be superfluous to this particular film, yet Rita Skeeter is included and Winky is not. The question I ask myself is:

What does this tell us about JK Rowlings plans for the final book?

Presumably Jo is in there telling the scriptwriters what is safe to cut and what is an absolutely vital clue for the final film. It would hardly make sense for the final book/film to come out and have it completely dependant in a certain plot point on something that was either skipped or changed in the porevious movies. We know Jo has been sowing clues and red herrings throughout the books but the films don't have the luxury of that much time. Makes me wonder if Rita Skeeter, like Gollum, has some part yet to play, for good or evil...

Ah, but perhaps there is an extended edition in the can that will include those essential plot points.

After sleeping on it, here’s what I think –

The film’s greatest problem is that it feels like a slideshow or checklist – probably unavoidable given the lengths of the book being adapted. Overall, I’d say that Newell and co. succeeded. Still, I’d be very curious to see what Cuaron would have come up with had he been given the book to adapt.

I didn’t think that Harry’s grief at emerging from the graveyard was overstated. After hearing what some others were saying I expected him to be tearing his hear and beating his head to the ground. The return from the graveyard was possibly the best-done part of the movie – I love the way the audience is clueless and claps and cheers and plays music and then it slowly dawns on them.

The script was well-handled as well. It struck a great balance between humour and seriousness – the directors of LotR could have perhaps learned a lesson from it.

The Yule Ball was very realistic. Probably too realistic – reminded me forcibly of things about High School I’d rather forget. The trial scenes – my favourite in any of the books, was well done (especially the way they condensed three into one).

Despite what everyone here has been saying, I wasn’t too impressed with Lord V. Fake Moody, Lucius Malfoy and Crouch Jr. were all more intimidating I thought. He seemed too agitated, running around like that, and I found his torture of Harry a bit understated (maybe I’m kinda comparing it to the Emperor’s torture of Luke in of Return of the Jedi here). Either way, he should have been given shoes – he came across as a half-crazed homeless person rather than the Dark Lord of the Death Eaters. I also think the fact that Harry was suspended above him weakened his affect. However, they made Harry’s escape believable, which is very commendable.

In my armchair director mode, I’d do the following –

1. Complain to the studio executives until they give me three hours to work with. If they don’t believe that 3 hours is appropriate for the target audience, I’ll ask how the target audience of an 800 page book cannot deal with a 3-hour film. If they argue that a 3-hour film couldn’t be successful, I’ll ask them to check out the lengths of the first and second highest grossing movies of the last ten years.

2. Open the film in the clouds at night, like the others. Plunge down to the Quidditch World Cup. It might seem superfluous, but it makes for a great way of bringing the audience into the filmoverse, and you really can’t take us there without showing it. Have the match already well progressed and simply show us the finale. Introduce Crouch Sr. on the way out – he wasn’t in the stadium itself.

3. Have the dream in the tent that night, followed by the Death Eater attack and all that. Make it seem that Crouch Jr. went straight from the Riddle House to the World Cup Grounds. Show us the Portkey and the Diggorys on the way out.

4. Go with all dispatch to the school and get everything sorted out there.

5. Drop Rita Skeeter and truncate the first task.

6. Have Fake Moody turn up at the death of Crouch. The audience can put two and two together later.

7. Introduce Bellatrix Lestrange in the courtroom – we need to be reminded about the menace that Lord V poses.

8. Slow down the events of the graveyard and the aftermath and introduce more dialogue so that the audience can take it in and so that everything’s explained and the loose ends are tied up.

9. Make Lord V more sombre, and give him some shoes.

10. Somehow tell the audience that the end of this film is different to the ends of the previous ones.

all very good ideas, LM.

I'd also add some to moody's paranoia... it just came off as quirkiness in the film...

I didn't notice that it was never actually mentioned - might have been an idea to do so. However, time constraints might have kicked in there. It was interesting how they chose to portray his hip flask thing as drunkeness rather than a fear of poisoning.

yeah, that was the thing missing...

I agree Moody should have been "mad" paranoid not "mad" insane.

You have to leave Rita Skeeter in, her role is crucial in OotP but I see how she's useless as a charachter here. I think they wanted to make sure they didnt leave too much for the next movie and just introduced her now rather than later.

Definately 3 hours, the film ran around way too fast, think if you missed even 5 minutes during the post-quidditch beginning, youd be horribly out of the loop.

I liked Lord V's face, I cant say it looked "snakelike" as it was supposed to be but I could tell it looked abnormal enough to get the point across. But the whole movie they portrayed him rather weakly. With all his frantic sayings, in the dream he almost sounded scared that the old muggle guy was outside the door ?_? then he turned and killed him without feeling as he should have. In the graveyard he did look kinda short with Harry hanging up there. And Wormtongue was way too highly regarded by Lord V; he didnt do enough sniveling and crying as i expected, especially after he cut his hand...he was like "ow" thats it! HE CUT OFF HIS FRIGGIN HAND!!!

I like the Bellatrix idea, especially because of the huge roles she plays in OotP and HBP

In this movie Crouch Sr wasnt discredited at all, at the end of the book I felt as if he'd never set foot in the Ministry again. But the movie even played him in good light even when convicting his son "broke his heart to do it but he had to" instead of "no one gets in the way of Crouch not even his son". And it doesnt mention that Crouch Jr was out of Azkaban because of the Sr does it? Which would totally shoot all of Sr's credibility.

The audience needed to feel more that the whole way everyone lives from then forth is going to change. Hermione's little "things are going to change now arent they?" crap did not do it for anyone. Harry even made it seem like theyd change for the better! There should have been like a "but we'll stick together through it all" or something to have that ending. The audience needs to feel the dread that Lord V. has returned, that chaos will run rampant in the next movie and people will drop off the earth like nothing and death will be everywhere.

Borry

Those are some good points, LM. How about you write for the next one, ok?

The OG Borry wrote:

You have to leave Rita Skeeter in, her role is crucial in OotP but I see how she's useless as a charachter here. I think they wanted to make sure they didnt leave too much for the next movie and just introduced her now rather than later.

Nah, I think anyone can fill her role. It'd take less time in the next movie to just have it be some reporter without much to distract from the story.

The OG Borry wrote:

And Wormtongue was way too highly regarded by Lord V; he didnt do enough sniveling and crying as i expected, especially after he cut his hand...he was like "ow" thats it! HE CUT OFF HIS FRIGGIN HAND!!!

I know! It would have been nice to see him at least fall to the ground clutching his arm or something. Make us think it was good and painful.

I have just bought the DVD, I saw th film twice in the pictures both times with my autistic son, who always makes viewing a major act of concentration.

I would have to say that having seen the disk I am disappointed. The overall feel of the films is exactly what I would have expected Mike Newell to come up with, it's type of smug coomfy Englsihness which pervades all he does, it's cliches like brass bands, bumptious middle aged fathers strait out of terry and june with hair over their ears, this is coupled with Grange Hill actings from Ron, Harry and Hermione

It think JKR paints a much more accurate picture of England in her books and Newells penchant for the twee evaporates all of that.

On the positive side the action scenes are preet good, the cgi though is generally poor the merpeople and the ermergance of voldemort being particularly bad.

I sincerely hope Newell dos not get another HP film, it's particularly irritating after the work that Cuaron did.

Personally I think they should use Del Toro, he undertands monsters, CGI, puppet suits and action - he does not suffer from tweeness

eborr, I wasn't aware that your son was autistic. Have you ever read any novels by Dean Koonts? He is quite the author and has some really good books. I believe one of his family members is autistic as well and therefore has autistic people as main characters in his novels. Makes them very intriguing and I think paints a more accurate picture as to behaviour and whatnot than what one might suppose to be autistic is like.

I liked GoF much more than any of the previous. I really disliked Cuaron and his PoA. I'm still puzzled as to why so many people liked it. It seems that Philosopher's Stone, Chamber of Secrets and Goblet of Fire all stuck the closest to the book whereas Prisoner of Azkaban veered away quite a few times yet people still like it more. I don't like his flying dementors and I don't like how the whole movie seemed to go along at one pace then all of a sudden you blink and the entire movie climaxed and it was over. I had the feeling that if I hadn't read the book I might not have understood what was going on. I really disliked the movie as a whole. Another thing, I'm a BIG John Williams fan put I preferred Patrick Doyle's soundtrack from GoF much better.

I still haven't watched PoA yet so am saving up GoF until I do. I must get round to reading the Half Blood Prince too.

I really disliked the first two films the first time around. 3rd was OK but the fourth was really excellent. And after giving the first two a couple years, I went back and watched them again and liked them considerably more.

Tosh, the Half Blood Prince was my favorite of the series (after PoA). I'd heartily recommend it.

The first two, I think, were just meant to be cute. They targeted a younger audience. I don't think they were really trying to play to an older audience which is why they weren't recieved well by it. Personally I love them.

Thewhitetree wrote:

eborr, I wasn't aware that your son was autistic. Have you ever read any novels by Dean Koonts? He is quite the author and has some really good books. I believe one of his family members is autistic as well and therefore has autistic people as main characters in his novels. Makes them very intriguing and I think paints a more accurate picture as to behaviour and whatnot than what one might suppose to be autistic is like.

Btw, it's Dean Koontz....and he has A LOT of books, most of which don't include autistic characters. Off the top of my head I can only think of 2, one of which I didn't really care for. (Sorry, he's just one of my favorite authors, so I'm curious as to what books you're thinking of that have autistic characters).

Sorry for the osgiliation. Go on with the Harry Potter talk.

Instead of writing in what is the equivalent to whispering perhaps we could discuss this in the Books forum. I'll check to see if there's a thread on Koontz already and if not I'll start one.

This made me laugh.

http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=814