Hype has led me to believe Harry Potter movies were great filmmaking or wonderful popcorn entertainment at least. Not having seen the previous three, I was at least hoping for something that didn’t watse my time.
It didn’t.
Yet, it didn’t inspire lofty views of praise either. The movie seemed plagued by editing, pacing and directing issues. Acting wise, i though everyone did a fine job, though I have no reference in which to compare their previous performances. But everything else felt as if they were rushing thorugh bits and pieces of the book, tacked on for fanboy placation and patching it together with spit and duct tape. And even that felt weird. How could they bring me to a world cup quidditch match and NOT SHOW ANY QUIDDITCH?
Still, the graveyard scene saved the entire movie which reminds me of what my film prof use to say. No matter how good you can make the first two-thirds of your movie, if the ending sucks, people will hate it. Vice versa and HPIV is enjoyable enough.
We saw it yesterday and really liked it. They cut the right subplots, managed to get the competition to be thrilling even though you know who is going to win and Radcliffe isn’t that bad an actor.
I too would like to have seen more Snape and the Rita Skeeter subplot pushed a little more (one of the best parts of the book IMO). But by and large it worked for us.
Lots of very young kids in the theater. Lots of very loud kids.
Saw this last night and I liked it quite a bit. Not quite as good as Prisoner, but leagues better than the first two. I don’t know what everyone’s problem is.
The “This is the best movie crowd” I have a question for you. Given this story don’t you think Cuaron would have done a better job with it? This movie was ok at best. They cut and edited this terribly. Som many things go unexplained while minutes are wasted on the Hagrid/Giant love interest for example.
OK, granted, I don’t believe this is the best of the four (my personal ranking goes 3, 1, 4, 2) I do believe that what Cuaron did with PoA was needed with GoF, specifically, finding a motif and allowing it to bind the movie together.
GoF was too scattered. Personally, I would have liked to see Rita Skeeter cut completely. The story line she was involved in (that of the school turning against Harry due to her articles) was cut, so why wasn’t she?
Instead, Newell could have had the ‘world relations’ bit as a stronger theme. GoF is the first time we’re really shown that problems with Voldemort (and magic in general) extends beyond Potter, Hogwarts, and England. The Hagrid-Giantess relationship would then have more of a place, as would the time spent on the ball. Heck, if he wanted to make some changes, have the other students join the Hogwarts kids in some classes (might have been a simple way to work the Blast-Ended Skrewts into the movie…)
Anyways, would Cuaron have made a better film? Not sure, as I truly liked Newell’s work with individual scenes, but I believe the film could have benefitted from Cuaron’s approach.
This is exactly how I feel. Some really great moments (“What should I have her do next? Jump out the window? Drown herself?”), but overall weaker than Prisoner.
What makes you think this is the director, though? Most of the flaws in this movie seem to be that the screenwriter cut and kept some of the wrong stuff from the book.
I agree totally. I think it’s telling how many of Cuaron’s new elements (the rookery, the bridge, the casual clothes) ended up in this film. It really did feel as if Newell just decided to go with his direction.
This was a film with some great scenes, but not a great film.
When the editing was as bad as this, at least some blame typically accrues to the director. My two cents.[/quote]
Agreed. No decent director says, “Well, principle photography’s all done. I’ll just hand this baby over to my editor and watch the finished product at the multiplex in a few months.” Check out the LOTR “making of” featurettes on DVD for a good example of how it should be done. Peter Jackson and his editor, who’s name escapes me, worked as a team to cut the film.
I don’t blame the screenwriter for GoF. I think a lot of material got edited out to meet length requirements, and that a “director’s cut” could turn GoF into a good film if that material was restored.
The people I went to see it with disagreed because none of them have read any of the books. There really wasn’t enough information in the movie to figure out what the plot was, and they had to simply sit there and enjoy the images presented without trying to figure out what was happening.
The people I went to see it with disagreed because none of them have read any of the books. There really wasn’t enough information in the movie to figure out what the plot was, and they had to simply sit there and enjoy the images presented without trying to figure out what was happening.[/quote]
I can see that, although I think, as mentioned above, a better edit would help.
This was a lot better than the first two, but damn they needed to cut more shit. I know it’s tough, but I would’ve axed the dance and the World Cup. Rita Skeeter’s plotline of internal conflict among the magicians comes up in future books. This would also have allowed Dumbledore’s ending speech to make a lot more sense.
Yeah, my complaints about the movie are about the cutting of various story elements. Given what they included, I think they did it rather well. However, I very much enjoyed the book, and there were several plot elements I wished were included.
