• Badkitty
    • 9 years 7 days ago
    • Posts: 922
    		 I thought the special effects were way better than the previous movies. I thought all in all it was a decent movie but I'd probably had liked it much better if I haden't been influenced by the book. I really didn't care for the portrayal of Voldemort and thought the the movie left out too many important facts causing continuity problems.
    I don't know about you, Miss Kitty, but I feel so much... yummier
    Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
    • MattNash
      • 9 years 7 days ago
      • Posts: 4312
      • Account Disabled
      		 To me, it just didn't seem as "magical" as the rest of the films. For instance, in the other three, there seemed to be magic everywhere like in the moving staircases, ghosts floating around, moving portraits on the wall and in this movie all the little magical detail, though they were there, were lacking. It did cut out alot of unnecissary details that ment nothing to the plot, but it also cut out a lot of stuff it didn't need to; We could have seen a litle more of the quidditch game and more of the Deatheater riot; we could have seen a little bit of the other contestants fight their dragons (We didn't even see Victor Crumb's Firey Red Dragon); and in the last maze, where were the monsters? Where was the Sphinx? Replaced by lame moving bushes.

      I did, however, enjoy the movie, it was entertaining, I just liked the others better.
      Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
      • SSJ Jup81
        • 9 years 7 days ago
        • Posts: 4806
        Sunriser wrote:
        What really annoyed me was the dragon scene. It was way too long/exaggerated and someone told me that some of it didn't even happen in the book.
        From what I remember, I don't think it did. All I remember is "Accio Broom", avoid Norbert, boom he gets the egg. Oh yeah, that wasn't mentioned. The dragon Harry ended up with, was the one that he and Hermione freed in book 1, which is how they got that detention to serve with Hagrid, along with Neville and Draco. Draco was the one who told on 'em for being out late, Neville was trying to warn Harry and Hermione and got caught too. If you're wondering whre Ron was, he was in the hospital wing due to an injury he'd gotten from Norbert earlier in the story.
        wrote:
        Why did they do that?! Why not chop it and use some of that time for character development or plot?! Speaking of the plot, this movie should have been two movies. Or a long movie with an intermission. Too much was left out and they'll have to make up for it in later movies.
        Maybe, maybe not. I guess they wanted to please the "non-readers" of the audience. So far, most of the people I know of who didn't like this movie were actual readers. If a subplot isn't directly connected to Harry, it seems like it's going to get drop. Sorta like the whole subplot dealing with the houselves and S.P.E.W, formed by Hermione who was outraged at the way Barty Crouch Sr. treated his houself, Winky. Would've been nice to see this played out on the big screen and would've made the plot even darker if they would've explained exactly how a "dead man", Barty Crouch Jr, escaped from Azkaban.
        wrote:
        Also, Gambon (new Dumbledore) just doesn't fit the part well. I know it's a daunting task to take over for McKellen, but they could've done better casting. He had a big part in this movie compared with POA and his weaknesses really showed up here.
        I'm assuming you were referring to Ian McKellen. Gambon took the place of Richard Harris. Anywho, I don't blame Gambon for his portrayal of Dumbledore. He can only do so much. If anything, one must blame Newell for directing him to act in such a way or the scriptwriter, not the actor himself. It's sorta like how PoA, they pretty much destroyed and butchered Ron's character, by lowering his status, and upped Hermione's too much turning her into some super heroine that doesn't exist in the books. That's probably why, for me, PoA is my least favorite. I can handle dropping things (some things), but I prefer correct and proper characterization.

        I felt like screaming. I was like, "If they give her another character's line, I will scream!" They showed her jumping in front of Harry to protect her from Sirius. Not only was it off, this was Ron's line and action. I so wish that this particular scene would've been left alone and done exactly like the book.

        They're outside the Whomping Willow, they see "Padfoot", he looks as if he's about to get Harry, but Ron willingly pushes Harry aside and gets bitten instead. He then drags Ron and his leg gets caught on a branch, they hear his leg break. Now, the two have to get into the tree (I actually prefer the movie's way because it was funnier). Ron ends up trying to defend Harry twice. First time, iirc, was when Ron got up on his broken leg, and told Sirius that he'd have to kill them before he could get to Harry. Other time, when he tried to attack him, all with a broken leg.

        I also liked the fact, that in the book, Ron was actually knocked out for the Time Turner thing. WHen they left the willow, Ron was tied to Peter and Lupin (Ron insisted). Lupin began to transform, and Peter took this opportunity to get away. He grabbed Ron's wand and attacked him.
        Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
        • Sunriser
          • 9 years 5 days ago
          • Posts: 3807
          SSJ Jup81 wrote:
          Maybe, maybe not. I guess they wanted to please the "non-readers" of the audience. So far, most of the people I know of who didn't like this movie were actual readers.


          That's true. I did know one person who hadn't read the book or seen the movies and liked it, but everyone I know agreed that the dragon scene was too much, reader or not. I think they were just trying to flex their special effects muscles.

          Oh, and the bushes in the last challenge cracked me up. "OMG, here comes a STRONG BREEZE. Don't be swallowed by the bushes!" :lol:
          Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
          • SSJ Jup81
            • 9 years 5 days ago
            • Posts: 4806
            nachtjager wrote:
            OK, well I guess there is a condescending attitude against us "non-readers". I posted about how much I enjoyed the movie. Without getting deep into it I guess I should say sorry for ruining it for you....... OH WAIT maybe its the 2 and a half hour time limit you should blame
            I liked movie 4 fine and I am a reader. Sure there are some things I liked in the book as opposed to the movie, but I'm not going to sit around and groan about it. Mostly, with me, I have a prob with characterization. I already know that some things are going to be dropped.

            Anywho, I was just giving a reason, and this isn't just with movies like HP, but mostly all movies are made to please those who haven't read a series as opposed to those who have since the "non-readers" probably outweigh the "readers". Take Lord of the Rings for example. I liked those movies fine, but I've never read the series, only [u]The Hobbit[/u] in Elementary school, and I barely remember that. The only ones who actually complained (seemingly) were the actual readers, not the non ones.
            Are you sure you want to delete this post? Yes | No
            Search
            Users Online