# Harry Potter IV - Spoilers welcome!



## Desdichado (Nov 18, 2005)

I have the day off today (for other reasons) and my wife and I have tickets for later this afternoon!  W00t!

Anyone else seen this yet?  How does it compare to 1) the book, 2) the previous movies?


----------



## buzzard (Nov 18, 2005)

It's on the docket for my evening. 

buzzard


----------



## tecnowraith (Nov 18, 2005)

Hopefully we are today, just waiting for my ride to get ready is the problem


----------



## orbitalfreak (Nov 18, 2005)

I saw the midnight showing last night.

The movie was great.  Visual effects were superb, including the dragon, merfolk, Voldemort's face, and the _Priori Incantatum_, which was almost as cool as the _Expecto Patronum_ effect from PoA.  The acting keeps getting better.  Fleur Delacour was sufficiently... distracting... for her role .  Don't look at me like that... the actress turns twenty-three in less than two weeks time.  Cho was decent, but didn't get much screen-time.

Don't go in expecting to have the entire book layed out before you, though.  There was a LOT cut from the books.  The Dursleys never made an appearance, nor did Mrs. Weasley (unless I just missed her), and the movie starts the morning that they all go to the Quiddich World Cup.  The Quiddich match itself is not shown; it jumps straight from the "Let the games begin" scene to the post-game celebrations.  This of course cuts the Lepruchan Gold sub-plot, and the Harry-is-rich/Ron-is-poor arc, though the strife that is supposed to be in this book/movie between the characters is still handled adequately.

The trials were nicely done.  The dragon was amazing, it moved well, was very believable.  The merfolk trial was cool, too, and the hedge maze was extremely spooky.  In one scene, the maze tries to close its walls to crush Harry - the entire theatre, myself included, let out a scream.

The gags in the movie were great.  Fredngeorge's "advanced physical maturism" was funny, Ron and Harry trying to find dates for the ball had us all rolling in the aisles for several minutes ("Why do they always have to travel in packs?!").  My second-favorite funny moment was when Harry opened the Egg inside the prefect's bathroom... and Moaning Myrtle made an appearance.  She kept coming closer... and closer... and closer... to our inadequately-clothed main character, who tried to keep his modesty by constantly piling bubbles around him.  Top honors, though, go Malfoy's brief excursion as a ferret and Mrs. McGonagall's admonishment to Moody that "Transfiguration is _never_ used as a punishment!  Surely Dumbledore informed you of that!" and Moody's reply of "Well, he may have mentioned it."

Mad-Eye Moody... He didn't look anything like the pictures in the book, but I felt that the actor did very well in capturing his mood.  He was a little more on the "insane" side of things than the "gravelly-voice creepiness" that I imagined in the books.  His evertwirling eye was nice.  The demonstration of the three unforgivable curses came out very good.  _Imperius_ on an enlarged spider-thingy, making it jump around on people (including poor Ron), had us all laughing.  "Watch it, I can make it dance... I can make it jump.  Perhaps onto Malfoy?  Or maybe jump out the window," as it hit a lens in the classroom.  The theatre seemed to realize that this wasn't quite funny, and silence came down when Moody continued with "Or maybe make her... drown herself" as he comes close to making the bug submerge itself in a bucket of water.  _Crucio_ had us all cringing, and _Avada Kedavra_ garnered gasps and "NO!"'s from the audience.

Speaking of the killing curse, that brings us to the Graveyard.  Voldemort, still in his pseudo-infant stage, is being carried by Wormtail, and instructs his servant to "Kill the spare."  Immediately, Wormtail launces an _avada kedavra_ curse upon Cedric, and he dies.  Just dies.  There's no theatrics, no suspenseful pause while we all wait for What-We-Know-Is-Coming(TM).  It's as quick as a gunshot, and completely without emotion from the murderer.  So sudden, so final, so cold.  They handled this scene perfectly.  I teared up when they finally got back to Hogwarts, and Amos Diggory cried over the body of his son.  It was quite emotional.

You know how the scene for the next three movies is going to be set, when at the end Hermione asks Harry "Nothing's going to be the same, is it?"

He puts his hand on her shoulder, and says "No."

Voldemort is back.


----------



## Tarrasque Wrangler (Nov 18, 2005)

Just got back from the noon show (I had one day of vacation left this year ).  _Loved it_.  Way darker than the other films, but with some very decent laughs.  For once, I felt that the changes that were made and things that were cut didn't detract from the film (with one exception that I'll get to in a bit), and in the case of SPEW, weren't missed at all.  The Yule Ball was done very well, and wasn't as much of a break in the action as it was in the book.  I'd read beforehand that the director had promised a much more "English" film, and it definitely came off that way.  Sorta hard to describe.  

The only part of the book that I felt was really missing from this film was the final fate of Barty Crouch Jr.  In the book, it set up the entire conflict between the Ministry and Dumbledore and those loyal to him, and how nobody believes Harry.  I really felt this would have been a critical scene going into the next film, and it seemed to be cut for the sake of ending on an up note.

I'd give it three and a half thumbs up, probably four if you don't know the book.

NOTE: fans of the band Pulp, look for Jarvis Cocker as the singer in the band that plays at the dance.  Those were some decent songs they were doing too.  Might have to look for that soundtrack.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 19, 2005)

That's who that singer was, I knew I recognized it but couldn't place it


----------



## tecnowraith (Nov 19, 2005)

I saw it today and I liked it better than the last one. I agree with feedback here. I liked that they focused most of the plot on Nevell as well cause of what will happen to him later on in the books. Ginny did not get to say much in the film but oh well. Im glad they showed more of Fred and George but was disappointmentt that Percy was cut and he has an important role in the next film I think. Overall, to me, the editing and storytelling was better than Azkaban.


----------



## Desdichado (Nov 19, 2005)

Got back a few hours ago myself, and I'll join the apparent chorus that this is the best HP movie yet.  I enjoyed it tons, and I thought that most of the cuts were carefully and skillfully done so as to leave the plot and feel of the book still pretty well intact.

My wife, who's never read the book, doesn't agree with me though.  She said she never got the impression that they were actually in school, as there were practically no classroom scenes and that the Triwizard challenges seemed to just follow each other more or less immediately, rather than having been spaced out throughout the school year.  She also thought that ironically, the movie was a lot of action, but very little magic.

I'm still mulling over her comments.  It's not unexpected that we'd react to it differently; to me it was an adaptation of a book that I already knew very well, while to her it was the sequel to three movies that we own.


----------



## Barendd Nobeard (Nov 19, 2005)

I will dissent.  

Just got back and I enjoyed it, but it's not the best HP movie.

And my daughter, the resident HP nut who never finds fault with anything HP ranked it last of the four films.  She plans to re-read the book tonight so she can go rip the movie to shreds on muggle.net this weekend.

My son, too, noticed the lack of magic in the movie (and he didn't like it).  That didn't bother me, at all.  There were enough magic curses flying around for me.

I liked the portrayal of Dumbledore in this film.  He seems not quite 100% confident and actually a littler nervous that he doesn't have all of the information.  I liked that.

The scene with Snape beating Ron and Harry was very funny.  And George & Fred stole every scene they were in (when they had dialogue).  The comic relief seemed more natural & less forced than in the three previous films.

Overall, I enjoyed it and I think they made some good cuts (that book really needed an editor).  My test of a film is: Do I want to see it again?  This one is a resounding "probably" for me.  By contrast, the first two I only bought on DVD since my daughter liked them.  The third one I loved and wanted to see again and buy right away.  This film is good, but it's no PoA.


----------



## Barendd Nobeard (Nov 19, 2005)

Oh, yeah, I loved the dragon (someone producing the next D&D movie, please see this one first) and the merfolk were great.  No trace of some Disney "Little Mermaid" here!

Best special effects of the series so far.

Also saw the King Kong and Superman trailers (among others), so that was fun.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Nov 19, 2005)

I'll agree that the 3 unforgiveable curses scene was exceptional - it went from funny to harrowing in a split-second.  Mad-Eye Moody was a blast throughout the movie.  Things were a little rushed.  I can see how someone would barely get the sense they were in school, but that's a sacrifice they had to make.

I'm not sure if I really thought Voldemort worked or not.  I keep thinking there was something slightly off in his appearance or manner.  I can't quite place it, though.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Nov 19, 2005)

Voldemort, I think, was what worked best for me, actually. The performance was very excellently inhuman. The best part of it was how he moved like a snake. Very slow, very languid, then bursts of inhuman speed.

Overall, I enjoyed the movie very much. The comedy was better handled than in any previous movie, and the action and scary sequences did not disappoint.

Demiurge out.


----------



## billd91 (Nov 19, 2005)

I think I'm going to have to see this one more than once before I can say whether it's better than PoA or not. It's making a good run for it for sure enough. I think GoF flows together better than PoA did, especially as it reaches the conclusion. While still pretty brisk, it feels less rushed and incomplete.

I was kind of sorry to see the house elves cut, but I can certainly understand why they simplified the story like they did. I was also a bit sorry that they didn't have Dumbledore say that Barty Crouch, Jr. died in Azkaban. Sure, they would have then had to explain how he got out and so on, but it would have added a nice bit of mystery.

One thing I think GoF does very well is the way it handles the students growing up and interacting like adolescents. It kind of brings back awkward memories. Between PoA and GoF, I think we've started seeing Hogwarts as more of a school than we ever did in the first two films although we aren't seeing as much classroom time. What we are seeing is a lot more of student and dorm life that really brings the setting to life.


----------



## frankthedm (Nov 19, 2005)

Barendd Nobeard said:
			
		

> Oh, yeah, I loved the dragon (someone producing the next D&D movie, please see this one first) and the merfolk were great.  No trace of some Disney "Little Mermaid" here!



Oh hell yeah! That scene almost came off as lovecraftian & felt _very_ close to deleted scene from _Dagon_. 

The Reign of Fire people called, they want thier dragon back.  [that was a good damn dragon. I hope there is an outake on the dvd where it eats harry]

I don't know if i like the way Lord Moldybutt looks, but I *loved *the way the wand battle came off feeling like the _DBZ Cell Saga_ final kamehameha fight.

The Kakarov students entry made them look like real wizards ready to chuck fireballs compared to the nearly helpless hogwarts students.

Moody ruled. Nuff said. The reveal that character was not the real moody was just as disheartening as it was in the book.

No soul food is served to the dementors  . That is what i felt was the real darkening point of the books.


----------



## Barendd Nobeard (Nov 19, 2005)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> Oh hell yeah! That scene almost came off as lovecraftian & felt _very_ close to deleted scene from _Dagon_.




If only book 5 had been "Harry Potter and the Esoteric Order of Dagon"....


----------



## WayneLigon (Nov 19, 2005)

Just got back from seeing it. It's utterly wonderful. I can't decide if I like it best of the four, but if it's not #1, it's #2.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 19, 2005)

WayneLigon said:
			
		

> Just got back from seeing it. It's utterly wonderful. I can't decide if I like it best of the four, but if it's not #1, it's #2.




ya, its between the first and the 4th as best movies for me.


----------



## Wereserpent (Nov 20, 2005)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> , but I *loved *the way the wand battle came off feeling like the _DBZ Cell Saga_ final kamehameha fight.





I thought that too!


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 20, 2005)

Saw it last night.  Best. Harry Potter. EVAR.

It moved fast, but flowed very nicely.  It didn't feel rushed, and it was A LOT of fun.  Started out dark and navigated between funny and scary throughout.  The three curse scene was excellent, as was Brendon Gleeson's performance as Mad Eye throughout.  The three tests were exciting, the comedy was actually funny (Snape's smackdown scene had people in the aisles).  I was VERY happy to see characters like Neville and the twins get much bigger and more important parts.  I felt like they were more than just 'in the room'.

Overall, just a great movie.  Better then Prisoner of Azkaban, IMHO, and that's saying something.  I really liked the new Peter Pan, so finding out that it's director will be doing HP #5 is good.


----------



## Queen_Dopplepopolis (Nov 20, 2005)

I left the theatre feeling very "Eh" about the whole movie.  I haven't read the book, but I felt like it covered too much, moved too quickly, and presented Harry in a negative light.  I've always felt a little like Harry was never the hero - just a lucky guy with friends in high places, but this film definitely took the cake.  I'm just not interested in what Harry does... I realize he's young and needs the instruction of the older, more experienced magic users, but - alas - I feel like the story is just Harry as a pin-ball being bounced around by various friends.

Moreover, I felt hosed because I didn't get to know any of the contestants in the Tri Wizard Cup very well... seems that they would be very interesting characters.  *shrug*

Lastly, I was bored and disinterested for large sections of the movie.

In the end - it was alright.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Nov 20, 2005)

I enjoyed it - but I prefer the Prisoner of Azkaban tbh as my fave.

This one misses out onf the FUN of being in Hogwarts. It missed out on the Dursleys. And the movie seems rushed without any real feel for the school year at all.

Sorry. Best Evar? Not even close.


----------



## orbitalfreak (Nov 20, 2005)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> This one misses out onf the FUN of being in Hogwarts.




Actually, I think that this was the intent of the movie.  Voldemort is back in power, they're encountering things that are beyond their capability to handle, and are entering into some extremely "not fun" territory.  It's a wake-up call to the dangers present in the (fictional) real world.


----------



## mojo1701 (Nov 20, 2005)

orbitalfreak said:
			
		

> It's a wake-up call to the dangers present in the (fictional) real world.




It'll get even worse in the fifth one...


----------



## Steel_Wind (Nov 20, 2005)

One question:

Isn't Molfoy now exposed as an active supporter of Voldemort?

And wouldn't Harry rat him out? Molfoy should be on the run or on his way to Azkaban.


----------



## gtJormungand (Nov 20, 2005)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> One question:
> 
> Isn't Molfoy now exposed as an active supporter of Voldemort?
> 
> And wouldn't Harry rat him out? Molfoy should be on the run or on his way to Azkaban.



He does.  Not many people believe him.  Since this book is my favorite of the series, I highly recommend reading it to find out more.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne (Nov 20, 2005)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> One question:
> 
> Isn't Molfoy now exposed as an active supporter of Voldemort?
> 
> And wouldn't Harry rat him out? Molfoy should be on the run or on his way to Azkaban.




This is a major theme of Book Five (and Movie Five, I'd imagine).  The answer is hinted at in Dumbledore's speech at the end: "The Ministry of Magic doesn't want me to tell you this..."


----------



## Steel_Wind (Nov 20, 2005)

Well, I hope the next time Molfoy crosses his path Harry reached for his wand and lets him now he'll blast him to smitherenes then.

This nicey nice game with the Molfoys must come to an end.  All pretenses are now over.


----------



## buzzard (Nov 21, 2005)

I enjoyed it. IMHo it vies with PoA for best of the series. 

However I must admit it did feel a bit rushed to me. The book being a very long one had to be shorn down a great deal to fit into the movie. Especially the aspect of the trouble of Harry and Ron's friendship felt rather shallow. 

But again, when you have a lot of book to cram in things get tricky. The effects were very nice, and the tone was quite appropriate. As with the books things keep getting darker. 

buzzard


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Nov 21, 2005)

Overall I think it was my favorite of the HP flicks so far.  4>2>1>3 I think.  Mad Eye was a bit different in tone than the book, but was quite excellent.  I liked Voldermort, but Wormtail is still not what I expect.  I thought he didn't play up the fact that he cut off his hand very well.  I think I'm liking the current Dumbledore more than RH's portrayal. In any event though it's a good flick.  I think they did a good job on cutting the story down to its core.


----------



## Desdichado (Nov 21, 2005)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> This one misses out onf the FUN of being in Hogwarts.



It wasn't really that fun of a year for Harry, though.  The movie didn't miss that; you missed the point.


			
				Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> It missed out on the Dursleys.



Not really.  The Dursley's pretty much do the exact same routine year after year, at least until we get into books five and six, where there's hints of development.

Although the Dursley interaction with the ton-tongue toffee was my favorite of the bunch, I can definately see cutting it in movie.  It is a bit superfluous--the other three movies have all shown the Dursley's getting their "beginning of the school year magical discomfiture"(TM) quite well.  I'd love to see the Weasley's blast through their living room as a deleted scene, though.


			
				Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> And the movie seems rushed without any real feel for the school year at all.



My wife said that too, but I don't know that any of the movies ever really made me feel like it was a school year, so I'm not sure that I agree that that makes any sense to complain about, really.  This movie really did have to rush--the book is some 750 or so pages long.  I think they did a great job of rushing without feeling rushed, though--and if sacrificing classroom scenes that--again--are pretty superfluous at this point unless something really significant is happening--then I can certainly accept that.


			
				Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> Sorry. Best Evar? Not even close.



I disagree.  Best Harry Potter movie to date, by a _loooong_ shot.  Prisoner of Azkaban was probably the one that disappointed me the most, although I think it's a better movie than 1&2.  The resolution of it felt rushed and empty compared to the same scenes in the book.  And Professor Lupin as the werewolf looked silly.  That was a big disappointment in the same season where we'd just seen the Van Helsing werewolves. 

Of course, the look of the werewolves in Van Helsing was one of the few bright points in that movie.


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 21, 2005)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> Well, I hope the next time Molfoy crosses his path Harry reached for his wand and lets him now he'll blast him to smitherenes then.
> 
> This nicey nice game with the Molfoys must come to an end.  All pretenses are now over.




You really should do yourself a favor and read the books.  

That said, for Harry to do that would be a DIRE mistake.  Remember, the ancient magic which protects him is from LOVE, not HATE.  Harry's inner decency is part of what makes him the hero; he didn't <i>have</i> to rescue Fleur's sister, for example...he did it because that's who he is.  He wasn't thinking about the game at that point, but about saving lives.  I'm also not sure if you mean Lucius or Draco in your statement...though I'd assume the former.  If you meant the latter, that's more complex, but I can't really discuss that without covering material from future books.

One of the major themes of books five and six (and arguably the series) is that the world is much more complex than it first appears.  There is a lot of subtext going on that doesn't become apparent until later about what the adults are doing throughout the series.  Many of the characters go from characitures to three-dimensional people as time passes.  

One thing I truly enjoyed about the movie was Michael Gambon's Dumbledore.  Originally I didn't think anyone could replace Richard Harris, but Gambon's rich characterization convinced me.  His Dumbledore is less sure than Harris', more stern and less whimsical.  Not unlike the transformation that Dumbledore (the character) undergoes as Harry becomes more privy to the things happening that he is unaware of.

The scenes with the Penseive, for example, were particularly good.  I also think it says a lot about the actors that many of them were willing to come back for sometimes very small parts.  Gary Oldman doesn't even phsyically appear in the picture, but he's there.


----------



## Desdichado (Nov 21, 2005)

WizarDru said:
			
		

> One thing I truly enjoyed about the movie was Michael Gambon's Dumbledore.  Originally I didn't think anyone could replace Richard Harris, but Gambon's rich characterization convinced me.  His Dumbledore is less sure than Harris', more stern and less whimsical.



Really?  I never much liked Richard Harris's Dumbledore.  The creaky, whispering old man who always looked really serious, even when attempting to deliver a whimsical line never seemed anything at all like the character as I understood him from reading the books.  I think Michael Gambon does a much better job altogether.  Although I admit he doesn't _look_ as much like Dumbledore in my mind as Richard Harris does.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Nov 21, 2005)

I've read the reviews here and looked a little more carefully at who is saying what.

I've also, upon reflection,  reconsidered my views on the movie. I think it is the worst of the 4 films to date.

My comment re: objecting to "missed out on the fun at Hogwarts" was that I missed the point: it wasn't _supposed_ to be a fun year...

Look: I didn't miss anything. I never read the book. The people who really like this film have read the books and enjoy Potter as it becomes a more serious fantasy tale. I have enjoyed the movies because they were fun. This wasn't _FUN_. Seeing as the fun of Hogwarts was the central chamr of the movie series to date - it doesn't get much more basic than that.

I have not read the books. I come to the table as a parent of kids who have read the books and love them (and my wife is a huge fan too) but otherwise - I'm _tabula rasa_ on Harry Potter.

What I know of HP I have come to know from the movies. To date, they have been fun and have captured the imagination by appealing to the desire that you really _wish_ it were true; you _wish_ there were some magical place like Hogwarts that you could be a part of and go to school there.

That's the underlying success of HP. It is a captivating tale that appeals to the viewer's underlying wish fulfillment and interest.

And none of that was present in the film. The ride on the Hogwart's Express is not to excite us about this wonderful place - but to show us that eating candy is a childish thing.

Hermione is depicted not as the most brilliant Wizard of her Age, but as a mere love interest - she is reduced to being depicted a mere _girl_.

The only classroom scene we get is the curses. The classroom scenes have in the past been brilliant - but not this time.

The dance was good and a poignant reminder of what it was to be 14, but the film concentrated so much upon that aspect of their school year that the rest is wholly absent.

A vast number of questions are left for those who have NOT read the books. Why isn't Malfoy exposed? Why isn't Potter believed? When has this kid _ever_ been wrong so as to dismiss him in this manner so out of hand?

Sure, if you've read the books you know the reasons for all of that (and so it has been explained to me patiently by my wife) and that the conspiracy at the Ministry of Magic which justifies all this is very much a part of the fifth book.

But none of that is clear and is barely alluded to in this film.

I really do think that those who are fans of the novel series are filling in the missing pieces from the film without appreciating how much those missing pieces greatly effect the experience of the viewer who is a *not* a reader.

And if may be so bold Joshua: If the movie missed out in the FUN of Hogwart's I didn't miss the point - not at all.  I came to the film expecting something charming and fun. That isn't what I received. 

And that is not a small point at all.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 21, 2005)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> A vast number of questions are left for those who have NOT read the books. Why isn't Malfoy exposed? Why isn't Potter believed? When has this kid _ever_ been wrong so as to dismiss him in this manner so out of hand?




Those are not answered in book 4. That is dealt with in the later books so very easily can be delt with in the later movies.  

Book 4 is differnet, it is not the same as the first 3 as the Valdomar plot really takes off and that has a profound impact on the setting.  JK took the series in a different direction then you wanted.  She's shown the magic of Hogwarts and played out the old formula.  Time to shake things up a little.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Nov 21, 2005)

Yes.  7 straight movies centering about the magic of Hogwarts would get boring very fast.  The time for centering on the school is pretty much over at this point.  Now it's a fight between good and evil.


----------



## Desdichado (Nov 21, 2005)

Steel_Wind said:
			
		

> And if may be so bold Joshua: If the movie missed out in the FUN of Hogwart's I didn't miss the point - not at all.  I came to the film expecting something charming and fun. That isn't what I received.
> 
> And that is not a small point at all.



You may indeed, but I still think you are mistaken about the majority of the audience.  You are assuming that what _you_ didn't like was what _everyone else_ wouldn't like, and I don't believe that the numbers will bear you out on that--i.e., read a sampling of the user reviews and critics reviews on Yahoo! Movies and Rotten Tomatoes.

My wife, like you, is a _tabula rasa_ for the films, and she noted a difference in tone, but she didn't like the movie less because of it.  The whimsical "fun" is not the point of Harry Potter, and if you've somehow reached that conclusion based on the last movies, then I can only say that I think you _have_ missed the point, not only of this movie, but of the previous three as well.

I also think you're unlikely to like the rest of the movies as they're made too, as they _all_ take this same darker, more serious, more mature tone.


----------



## Xath (Nov 21, 2005)

I saw it at the midnight release.  Although I thought it was successful in compressing the book, I was dissapointed in how they handled things.

Dumbledore: He was too clunky in this book.  He stomped around everywhere and didn't have that sense of calm which I identify him with.  Also his accent went all over the place.

Moody:  Even if I hadn't read the books, I would have known Moody was the bad guy.  He kept doing the tongue thing that all of the bad guys were doing.  Also, they brought up the fact that someone was making Polyjuice Potion way too many times.  I didn't like the way he looked either.  Moody had injuries, but while reading, I never felt that he was signifigantly hindered by them.  Also his eye was supposed to be electric blue and actually set into his socket.  I didn't like how they padded it out and how they made it look like an actual eye.  He was entirely too cartoony.

Krum:  He wasn't stupid in the books.  Hermione never would have dated anyone who couldn't hold his own mentally.  Also, he never says Her-mi-o-ninny.  I really wanted to hear that.

Beaubattons and Durmstrang:  They're not all girl/boy schools.  Minor irratant, but there you go.

The Maze:  I understand why they compressed the maze, but I missed the Sphinx, giant spiders, and the Blast Ended Skrewts.  

Madame Maxine:  She was supposed to be beautiful, but large.  This woman was not.  Also, they never got into the whole "half giant" bloodline which becomes important later.

Rita Skeeter: I liked the actress and the portrayal, but there wasn't much there.  There were no scandals and Hermione didn't see her as an Animagus which also becomes important in the next books.

Percy/Mrs. Weasley/Winky/Dobby: Where were they?  

As far as continuity goes, Barty Crouch Jr. was never at the old Riddle place.  They ignored the fact that Harry's wand was used to make the Dark Mark in the sky.


----------



## Pyrex (Nov 21, 2005)

I get that you have issues with the film.  There was a great deal cut so that they could pack what was left in to 2.5hrs.

So, my question is:  If you want more Weasleys, more house-elves, more Rita and more Blast Ended Skrewts; what would you have cut to make space for them?

Note: As much as *I'd* have no problem with it, HP4 is still targeted at a younger audience.  A six-hour epic is just not in the cards.


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 21, 2005)

Xath said:
			
		

> I saw it at the midnight release.  Although I thought it was successful in compressing the book, I was dissapointed in how they handled things.




A lot of the changes you suggest would have consumed more screen time; what are you proposing to cut in favor of those additions...or are you proposing the movie should be 3 hours long?

Some things have ripple effects; if you introduce the 'he used Harry's wand' thread, you have to play that out, or it does more damage than good.  If you introduce Winky, then that adds a whole lot of material...and if you add Winky, the audience is going to wonder where Dobby is, adding more material.  And so on and so forth.



			
				Steel Wind said:
			
		

> What I know of HP I have come to know from the movies. To date, they have been fun and have captured the imagination by appealing to the desire that you really wish it were true; you wish there were some magical place like Hogwarts that you could be a part of and go to school there.
> 
> That's the underlying success of HP. It is a captivating tale that appeals to the viewer's underlying wish fulfillment and interest.




That certainly is a part of the appeal of Harry Potter...but I'd suggest that Joshua's right, many, perhaps most viewers went to Harry Potter with the expectation of the continuing story of the Boy Who Lived.  Hogwarts is fun...but Harry's world is also full of dark, dangerous places.  I mean, in the first movie he nearly gets killed three times, at least.  In the second film, the school is stalked by a horrible monster.  In the third movie, an escaped lunatic is hunting him, his death is foretold constantly, his pet is nearly put to death and he's nearly killed by a werewolf and horrific ghosts of despair, among other things.

I think you're suffering from disappointment based on expectations...but I think you missed how dark Harry Potter gets, at times.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 21, 2005)

WizarDru said:
			
		

> A lot of the changes you suggest would have consumed more screen time; what are you proposing to cut in favor of those additions...or are you proposing the movie should be 3 hours long?




Yes, it should have been 3 hours...or longer


----------



## Broccli_Head (Nov 21, 2005)

*i like dark tones*

I liked GoF better than the rest of the others. After the first movie I made a crack at reading the first book, and couldn't get into it. Now that its taken a more sinister tone, I think I might try again to fill in the details. 

To me this movie was the end of the innocence that was prevelant in the first three. BBEG is back and much more violence and death. Also, seemed a shifting of pre-teens to teens with more boy/girl interaction.


----------



## Rykion (Nov 21, 2005)

I take kids to Harry Potter movies and wouldn't have a problem with a 3 hour plus movie.  I understand some cuts/simplification were needed, but I believe the next director has inherited a harder job because of too many cuts.  Dumbledore should have explained more of what happend at the end and mentioned the fate of Barty Crouch jr.  The Priori Incantatum scene is still confusing to those who haven't read the books, and Crouch being alive complicates the Ministry's lack of belief in Harry.  There needed to be more about the stories Rita Skeeter published, so the audience will understand that much of the wizarding world has begun to see Harry as a lying attention seeker.  Hermione did a lot to help Harry get ready for the challenges, but you really didn't see that.  All of the important things could have been added at the cost of maybe 10 more minutes.  An extra half hour could have also given more time to some of the background and background characters that add depth to the series.

I generally liked the acting better, but felt the story was too weak, especially for an audience that can't fill in the gaps from having read the book.  The scene where Dumbledore grabs Harry and is very angry about his name coming out of the goblet is completely out of character.  Dumbledore does not easily lose his cool, and when he does it should appear in his eyes, not his voice or physical actions.  It was the single most disappointing scene of any of the movies IMO.  I rate Goblet of Fire 3rd of the 4 movies, only being ahead of PoA.


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 21, 2005)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Yes, it should have been 3 hours...or longer




Why?


----------



## Crothian (Nov 21, 2005)

WizarDru said:
			
		

> Why?




Because the movie needed to be longer.  There was so much cut out that the movie isn't complete for some people that haven't read the book.


----------



## Desdichado (Nov 21, 2005)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Because the movie needed to be longer.  There was so much cut out that the movie isn't complete for some people that haven't read the book.



That doesn't mean the movie needed to be longer, though.  A better-written screenplay could have done the same thing.

Still, I thought it actually _didn't_ need to be longer and the screenplay was great; it rushed through the novel without ever really feeling rushed.  The only thing that I thought needed a little more time was the priori incantatum business, which in the movie doesn't get any explanation at all.


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 21, 2005)

Joshua Dyal said:
			
		

> That doesn't mean the movie needed to be longer, though.  A better-written screenplay could have done the same thing.
> 
> Still, I thought it actually _didn't_ need to be longer and the screenplay was great; it rushed through the novel without ever really feeling rushed.  The only thing that I thought needed a little more time was the priori incantatum business, which in the movie doesn't get any explanation at all.




I agree about the Priori Incantatum...although my memory of the explanation for that from the book is sketchy, as well.  I do think they could have spent a few more lines there, though.

As it is, the film is 157 minutes, roughly 13 of which are CREDITS (is that a record)?  Clearly, most critics don't seem to think  the film had script problems or was too short.


----------



## Desdichado (Nov 21, 2005)

To be clear; I don't think that either.  I'm saying that things being unclear or missing is not necessarily an indicator that the movie needed to be longer.  Frankly, a movie that's already 2.5 hours, roughly, very seldom needs to be longer.  Especially one based on a book who's primary audience is pretty young.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Nov 21, 2005)

The non-geek friends I went to see the movie with, and thier kids especially, were all squirming by the time the end got there so I don't know if longer would appeal to anyone who didn't read the books.


----------



## Phaedrus (Nov 21, 2005)

I have a plot question...

The TriWizard tournament is for "eternal glory." They play up what a big deal it is.
Then at the end of the movie it just whimpers away.

Did Harry win? Did they cancel it b/c what's-his-name was killed?
Where's the eternal glory?

The whole ending of the movie was a fizzle for me. Momentous events with Voldemort that are glossed over into end of the schoolyear goodbyes. It didn't work for me... it didn't make sense. If the prime evil is back, why is everyone smiling?

And I agree with the post from much earlier: 


> I've always felt a little like Harry was never the hero - just a lucky guy with friends in high places, but this film definitely took the cake. I'm just not interested in what Harry does... I realize he's young and needs the instruction of the older, more experienced magic users, but - alas - I feel like the story is just Harry as a pin-ball being bounced around by various friends.




If Harry is such a powerful prodigy... why is he always so passive and clueless?

(Guess you can tell I haven't read any of the books)


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 21, 2005)

Phaedrus said:
			
		

> If Harry is such a powerful prodigy... why is he always so passive and clueless?




Because all of the people around him treat him like an idiot and keep him in the dark, mostly.  Expect to see a perenially ticked-off Harry in the next movie, as No One Belives Him.  There are a lot of reasons why Harry spends a good chunk of his time just trying to get through the day, which are visible in the movie but reinforced heavily in books.

Mind you, I wouldn't say movie-Harry is passive.  He spends a good chunk of all four movies acting on his own, sometimes in open defiance of his authority figures.  Voldemort would have succeeded in the first two movies without Harry's interference.  In the third movie, Sirius Black would have been killed without Harry's help.  If you mean, why isn't Harry the smartest, the most powerful or the most noble....he's not.  That's kind of the point, really.  That's one reason so many younger readers can relate to him and his friends.  Each one has different traits that appeal to different readers/viewers.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 21, 2005)

I don't think Harry is that powerful of a Wizard.  He's a baby that was in the wrong place at the wrong time.  His mom used that old love magic to defend him from the most horrible wizard ever.  That created a link between the two and made him the focus of Vorty's comeback.  

That's the only thing special about Harry, he's not that great of a Wizard but becasue of all this problems in his past he has managed to make great allies to offset the great enemies.  

As for why people would believe the 14 year old, no one wants to believe Vorty is comeing back.  Everyone things he his dead and they have no reason to think otherwise.  Its not like the hidden happens at Hogswart make the front page of the magic newspaper.


----------



## orbitalfreak (Nov 21, 2005)

Phaedrus said:
			
		

> I have a plot question...
> 
> The TriWizard tournament is for "eternal glory." They play up what a big deal it is.
> Then at the end of the movie it just whimpers away.
> ...




I think it's along the lines of the Olympics, World Cup, or something.  In the wizarding world, you're probably looking at a smaller population, so you wouldn't be forgotten as quickly.

And, I think that Harry did win, but no one cares.  Cedric died, and the dark lord returned; that pretty much overshadows anything else from the TWT.


----------



## Xath (Nov 22, 2005)

I wouldn't have minded seeing a longer movie.  But as I said, the movie was well compressed, I just missed seeing alot of things.  I think some of what they skipped is going to haunt them in the next movie, unless the DVD has alot of extra scenes.  

To me the HP movies are more of a "see your favorite scenes acted out with special effects."  They're more of a supplement.  If you want the whole story, read the books.  That being said, I'd like to see more of my favorite scenes acted out with special effects.


----------



## JoshWilhoyte (Nov 22, 2005)

Add me to the disapointed side.  I think I probably cared for the GoF least of the four movies.  The first two followed the letter of the books very well, but lost some of the spirit in doing so.  PoA diverged from the books a fair amount, but their changes and additions "felt" more like Hogwarts and I thought they captured the spirit of the book.  Meanwhile, Goblet of Fire didn't seem to follow the letter or the spirit of the books.  

  They hacked out massive chunks of the novel, and while I understand that they needed to trim it down, I think they underestimated their audience.  Millions of 8 year olds have read this 750 page book a dozen times.  You don't think they'd sit through a three hour movie?  Or two 2 hour movies?  I think they would.

  IMO, most of the changes weren't very good, and many were pointless.  Such as the very mechanical set up at the Quidditch World Cup, the fact they were in the nosebleeds instead of in the Top Box.  The Moody twist went from being heart-breaking and shocking to dull and way too foreshadowed.

  I've seen several people say that book 4 isn't a cheery and fun book to read.  What the heck?  Bour four was an awesomely fun read.  Sure, Harry's miserable for several large chunks of it, and it's got the devastating ending (Mood's still by favorite DADA teacher, and he's the bad guy?  Cedric's death, I liked Cedric, JK built him into a character with real heart in books 3 and 4.  Voldemort's return), but most of the book is fun to read and imagine.  The ball was great, the tasks were fun to read and watch.  Meanwhile, in the movies, the dragon looked cool, but otherwise the 1st task looked kind of silly.  The mage who just summoned his broom from a mile away can't easily get it from four feet away?  The second task was pretty boring, and it cut out most of the interesting parts from the book.  And the third task was utterly blah.  The final task was a hedge maze that sometimes tries to eat you?  WTF?  That's their replacement for Giant Spiders, Blast Ended Skrewts, magical spells and a Sphinx?  

  All in all I felt they cut out too much, cut out many of the wrong things, dumbed down the story, plots, twists, and characterizations entirely too much.  The above poster who thinks Neville got better play in this movie should see how much more he's gotten in the novels.

  Don't get me wrong, there were good parts.  Fred and George were hilarious.  The scene where Harry asks Cho to the ball was perfect.  The scene where Ginnie and Hermione help Ron back after he asks Fleur to the ball was perfect.  Ron's "helping" Harry for the first task was funny.  Neville was good, and Ginnie got a few more props.  The Moody/Draco/ferret scene was hilarious.

  Still, all in all, blah.  Should've made it a mini-series.

  Edit: And for those of you who haven't read the books, give them a chance, just read the first one.  It's better than you think.


----------



## billd91 (Nov 22, 2005)

orbitalfreak said:
			
		

> I think it's along the lines of the Olympics, World Cup, or something.  In the wizarding world, you're probably looking at a smaller population, so you wouldn't be forgotten as quickly.
> 
> And, I think that Harry did win, but no one cares.  Cedric died, and the dark lord returned; that pretty much overshadows anything else from the TWT.




Speaking of the Olympics, think of the glory of the 1972 Olympics in Munich, particularly for the Israeli team. That will probably help people understand why there was no being covered in glory.
The co-winners suddenly appear and one of them, a popular student, is dead and the other one saying that the scariest wizard who ever lived is back. That should end the party right there.


----------



## RangerWickett (Nov 22, 2005)

One of my friends refers to it as "Harry Potter and the Giant F***ing Pile of Money."


----------



## Rykion (Nov 22, 2005)

The lack of explanation of the Priori Incantatum scene is what sticks out most to people that haven't read the book.  The other cuts will be more important in the next movie, as the next director will have to invent scenes to explain things or ignore large parts of the story.  



			
				Crothian said:
			
		

> That's the only thing special about Harry, he's not that great of a Wizard but becasue of all this problems in his past he has managed to make great allies to offset the great enemies.



Harry definitely has the ability to be a great wizard, but he is a major league slacker like Ron.  When he focuses on learning something, he has shown more ability than the other students of his class.  The Patronus he conjured in the third movie/book is years ahead of what he should be able to do.  He is well ahead of everyone else in magic that matters to him, defense against the dark arts.  That said, he is very fortunate to have the allies he does.


----------



## WizarDru (Nov 22, 2005)

JoshWilhoyte said:
			
		

> The above poster who thinks Neville got better play in this movie should see how much more he's gotten in the novels.




If you're talking about me, then you're mistaken in thinking I haven't read the books.  Neville, like all the characters, gets much more time to do things in the books.  In point of fact, I think Neville is under-used in the books, but he gets his chance to shine in OotP, as do the rest of the DA.  My point was that he, the twins and others actually got _meaningful_ screen time _in the movie_, as opposed to being one step above extras as they were in the most of the previous two movies.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Nov 22, 2005)

Rykion said:
			
		

> The lack of explanation of the Priori Incantatum scene is what sticks out most to people that haven't read the book.  The other cuts will be more important in the next movie, as the next director will have to invent scenes to explain things or ignore large parts of the story.
> 
> 
> Harry definitely has the ability to be a great wizard, but he is a major league slacker like Ron.  When he focuses on learning something, he has shown more ability than the other students of his class.  The Patronus he conjured in the third movie/book is years ahead of what he should be able to do.  He is well ahead of everyone else in magic that matters to him, defense against the dark arts.  That said, he is very fortunate to have the allies he does.




You are correct.  Harry has a lot of potential and ability that will only get greater as he gets older.   I can only imagine that he will defeat Voldemort in a duel of some sort next book.


----------



## Arnwyn (Nov 22, 2005)

I will echo what all the other non-HP-readers had to say: this movie was generally 'bleh'.

I found it quite silly in places, too fast and frenetic, and fairly incomprehensible throughout. While the absolute overall general storyline is reasonably clear, there are so many details and events that are left unanswered that the movie becomes quite unsatisfying. And, again as a non-HP-reader, the whole 'dark arts defense' teacher being screwed up was trite and even predictable. 

I am thankful, though, that I had my trusty translator beside me (read: Mrs. Arnwyn) to help me understand what the heck was going on, and what the significance of x, y, and z was.

Now, I certainly do understand that the director/writer(s) had to make a decision on how to present the movie and what assumptions to make - and it looks like the assumption was that movie-goers have read the books. I think that's probably a wise decision, considering how many books have been sold - but, regardless, there is no question about it AFAIC: this movie does not stand on its own.

(And, as to the "critics/RottenTomatoes/teh intarweb reviews" line of thinking - I'll hazard a guess that most of them have read the books.)


----------



## Crothian (Nov 22, 2005)

Rykion said:
			
		

> When he focuses on learning something, he has shown more ability than the other students of his class.  The Patronus he conjured in the third movie/book is years ahead of what he should be able to do.  He is well ahead of everyone else in magic that matters to him, defense against the dark arts.





Um, he was okay when he was being taught...but it wasn't until he realized he had done it that he was able to do it.  I don't think shows his skill, I think that's like me seeing my future self make a full court basket ball shot and since I know at this time I'm predestenied to make the shot I go ahead and make the shot.


----------



## Rykion (Nov 22, 2005)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Um, he was okay when he was being taught...but it wasn't until he realized he had done it that he was able to do it.  I don't think shows his skill, I think that's like me seeing my future self make a full court basket ball shot and since I know at this time I'm predestenied to make the shot I go ahead and make the shot.




Any Patronus at all would be more than a 3rd year should be able to do.  In the books at least, he got good enough to conjure it regularly when being taught.  The Patronus he conjured to save himself and Sirius was powerful enough to scare away a large group of dementors.  It is something very few full grown wizards could accomplish.  Realizing he had seen himself doing it before gave him confidence, but confidence is nothing without ability.  In your basketball analogy, it would be like a 13 year old regularly making a half court shot and then making a full court one once he realized he was strong enough to do it.  In the books, you see that Harry excels at defense against the dark arts in books 3+.  By book 5, classmates and older students are asking him to teach them.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 22, 2005)

Rykion said:
			
		

> Any Patronus at all would be more than a 3rd year should be able to do.  In the books at least, he got good enough to conjure it regularly when being taught.




In school the kids who got the extra lessons and got the teachers to personally help them usually exceled in the course as well.  This is not about personal talent, it is about extra practice, extra teaching and learning.  Ya, he did things unusual for kids his age but kids his age are also not being given the oppurtunity and personal lessons to do so.  Also, he is driven to learn since it will save his life.  That ype of motivation will even have the not talented people do pretty darn good.  Ya, Harry does things that normal kids his aage can't but only because of Harry's unique circumstances and extra help he gets.


----------



## Rykion (Nov 22, 2005)

That is true to an extent, but it is like a 6th grader learning algebra in a system that teaches it in 9th grade.  The student will probably need a personal tutor, but that doesn't make algebra something most 6th graders are ready to learn.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 22, 2005)

Rykion said:
			
		

> That is true to an extent, but it is like a 6th grader learning algebra in a system that teaches it in 9th grade.  The student will probably need a personal tutor, but that doesn't make algebra something most 6th graders are ready to learn.




I think if the 6th grader realizes that some big bad is going to probably kill him and algebra is his only defense, he gets ready pretty fast.


----------



## Rykion (Nov 22, 2005)

Crothian said:
			
		

> I think if the 6th grader realizes that some big bad is going to probably kill him and algebra is his only defense, he gets ready pretty fast.




True as well, but isn't a 23 year old that has finished medical school to save himself/herself from an unknown disease still exceptional?  Exceptional ability is still needed to learn things more advanced than normally taught at a certain age, regardless of extra teaching.

Edit: Must slow down to make myself readable. 
Edit, the second:  I also believe that the books do a much better job of showing Harry as having exceptional abilities.  He does seem pretty average by the movies.  It is another "cut" that I feel weakens the movies.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 23, 2005)

If at age 23 Harry gets a magical doctorate then it will be exceptional.


----------



## mojo1701 (Nov 23, 2005)

Crothian said:
			
		

> If at age 23 Harry gets a magical doctorate then it will be exceptional.




Dr. Harry Potter, (the other) M.D.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 23, 2005)

mojo1701 said:
			
		

> Dr. Harry Potter, (the other) M.D.




I don't think he will...I think he dies at the end of the 7th book....


----------



## mojo1701 (Nov 23, 2005)

Crothian said:
			
		

> I don't think he will...I think he dies at the end of the 7th book....




Yeah, I had that feeling, too.


----------



## Rykion (Nov 23, 2005)

The best proof of Harry's power in the first 4 books, besides the Patronus, is the Priori Incantatem scene.  When Voldemort and Harry cast a spell at the same time, their magic formed a connection because they both have wands with a magical core from the same source.  It then became a battle of wills to see who would gain the upper hand.  Harry won that battle.   As he drove Voldemort's magic back on itself, Voldemort's wand began casting its spells in reverse.  Harry won a straight up battle of will with the someone who is one of the most powerful dark wizards ever.  I would have to call that exceptional for an adult let alone a 14 year old.

I also believe there is a good chance Harry won't survive the 7th book.  It will be up to Neville to save the world.


----------



## buzzard (Nov 23, 2005)

I just talked to a buddy of mine who saw the movie last night,  has read none of the books, and he thought it was the best of the lot so far. He didn't feel that it was rushed, nor did he really feel that he missed out on much. In fact, he felt it was a good enough movie that he intends to go out and read all the books now. 

This was a review I was waiting for since I feel that my view that the movie felt rushed was predicated on how much I knew was missing from reading the book. 

buzzard


----------



## Jeremy (Nov 23, 2005)

Haven't read the books.

Favorite movie so far.

Little confused at the end at the "Ministry doesn't want me to tell you this..." and Hermione's seemingly unprompted "Everythings going to be different now"

Wished the movie was 3 hours longer just because I was having such a great time all the way through the movie.


----------



## sniffles (Nov 23, 2005)

I enjoyed it quite a lot. I think it's the most cohesive of the movies so far. I always felt the first two films were trying a bit too hard to put in as much as possible from the books. 
I did wish there had been a bit more time for characters like McGonagall and Snape, but there was just too much going on. 

I also realized one tiny feature I wish the costumers had focused more on: in the books folks from the wizarding world dress very eccentrically by Muggle standards, but they've lost that in the films - the Weasleys, for instance, dress in a quite ordinary manner. Oh well, minor nitpick.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 23, 2005)

Jeremy said:
			
		

> Little confused at the end at the "Ministry doesn't want me to tell you this..." and Hermione's seemingly unprompted "Everythings going to be different now"




I think it made sense since Voldomort is back and everything is going to change knowing the greatest evil is back.  I do think they should have gone into the Ministry side of things a bit more though


----------



## Jeremy (Nov 23, 2005)

I would have understood it in that context.  If it had gone straight from Lord V has returned to Everythings going to be different.

But it went from Dumbledore to schools out for summer and goodbyes and lots of little people giving hugs and such then to Hermione.  I guess I'll draw that line now, but it's a stretch and at the time it was confusing to me in a 'where'd that come from?' type way.


----------



## Dakkareth (Nov 25, 2005)

Woah, this is a first time.

The first time I really liked a book, wanted to like the movie too, and then the movie adaption went WAY past the acceptable suck-factor*. Incredibly rushed, more important parts left out than I can count and the distinct feeling of NOT being a real Harry Potter movie at all. A good thing, that the director won't be doing HP again if I heard correctly, apparently our ideas simply clash too much in this.

After a 'well, it was ok, I guess' first movie and a somewhat better second one there came PoA, which I veritably loved - and now I wanted Goblet of Fire to be a repeat of that, wanted another great movie. And thus I was much disappointed . 

Oh well,

-Dakkareth 

(* there is of course the normal factor in any book-movie adaption, but usually it's tolerable and most importantly offset by other qualities. There were many good scenes in the GoF movie and a few really great ones, but by no means enough for me to think differently about it.)


----------



## Hijinks (Nov 25, 2005)

> I'm not sure if I really thought Voldemort worked or not. I keep thinking there was something slightly off in his appearance or manner. I can't quite place it, though.




*cough* No Nose. *cough*



> Why isn't Malfoy exposed? Why isn't Potter believed? When has this kid ever been wrong so as to dismiss him in this manner so out of hand?






> Little confused at the end at the "Ministry doesn't want me to tell you this..."




What's made clear in the books, but not the films, is that the Ministry of Magic does NOT want everyone to know that Voldemort isn't dead.  The general population of wizards and witches believe he is dead, and there is no fear, freaking out, etc.  When he was alive and rampaging through the wizarding world, he caused a great deal of fear and panic, not to mention killing good witches & wizards every time he sneezed.  He is a figure of much lore, rumor, and many wizards think he was 20 feet tall and made of iron and totally unkillable.  Those who run the Ministry feel that if they release the information that he is still alive to the general public, they'll have mass hysteria.  

Harry and his friends and professors know that Voldemort isn't dead, but the Ministry keeps covering their encounters with him and his minions up.  Every time something has happened, those in Harry's circle know about it, but no one else does.  Most of the students at the school have no idea Voldemort was in the back of that one professor's head, or living in the woods eating unicorns, or all of the other things that he's done.  We are in the know because we've watched the films, and so it's easy to assume that everyone else knows, too, but only a select few do.

Harry and his cohorts are really working against the Ministry throughout the books.  I think this will be more obvious in OoTP, at least I hope so.



> Did Harry win? Did they cancel it b/c what's-his-name was killed?
> Where's the eternal glory?




I was unhappy about the way this happened in the film.  If I remember correctly, it's Cedric who turns back to help Harry finish the maze, not the other way around.  So I've always considered Cedric to be the real winner, and Harry is only considered the winner because Cedric is dead.  It felt like Harry won in the film just because he was Harry, and because Harry is always supposed to win.  I found it much more tragic in the book that Cedric was the true winner, who was supposed to get the eternal glory.

We'll see the effects of him being the Triwizard Champion in the next book.  IIRC, he won 50 gold Galleons, which he gives to Fred & George to start a joke shop.


----------



## David Howery (Nov 25, 2005)

Finally saw this on Weds.... I have to think that this was a movie made almost entirely for those who read the book, because someone who didn't would have a hard time understanding everything that's going on.  That said, they should really do these movies like LOTR... film extra scenes that go into more detail and put it in a special extended DVD version....


----------



## Dakkareth (Nov 26, 2005)

David Howery said:
			
		

> Finally saw this on Weds.... I have to think that this was a movie made almost entirely for those who read the book, because someone who didn't would have a hard time understanding everything that's going on.



For me it was exactly the other way around. *Because* I have read the book (many times), I'm annoyed because of the parts left out. If I hadn't read the book ... well, I probably wouldn't have understood much of what was really going on, but it still would have been cool. Not understanding doesn't mean finding no enjoyment, while as a 'fan' it's easy to get riled ...


----------



## Mark Chance (Nov 26, 2005)

Saw it with my son yesterday. It was better than the others, which means I was able to stay awake for the entire film. Otherwise, it was trite (verging on puerile), unevenly acted, and predictable (and, no, I've not read the book).

OTOH, my son enjoyed it immensely, so I guess it was worth the price of admission for that alone. I'm accustomed to my tastes differing from those of an 8-year-old.


----------



## qstor (Nov 26, 2005)

buzzard said:
			
		

> I just talked to a buddy of mine who saw the movie last night,  has read none of the books, and he thought it was the best of the lot so far.




My wife is into the books and I saw it with her yesterday. I had the same feeling. I like the scenes in the graveyard.

During the duel, I couldn't help but think what D&D spells Harry should have used 
Like wall of Force, locate creature and passwall 

Mike


----------



## TanisFrey (Nov 30, 2005)

my gripes, movie by movie

HP-SS minor girpe action was played up over dialog

HP-COS Major gripe the falling out of the car (wrecked the paceing of the movie); minor action over dialog agin

HP-POA WTF??? the womping williow was next to the school is now hundrads of feet away; minor major over hall of costume espicaly the look of Prof. Flick.  and action was favored over dialog once more 

HP-GOF Thank goodness that did not change the placment or look of anything, still dont like the look of Prof. Flick.  liked how they shorted the world cup and after math and the arivial of the other schools.      why are the two school are totaly one sex or the other?  and action was favored over dialog AND PACING.  WTF??? PLOT HOLE INTRODUCED for the NEXT movie.

The dragon task was too long and could have been shortened to allow more normal pacing.  And she should have other eggs to protect other than the golden egg.

AND WOULD hurt to add 10-30 Seconds of time to explaine Priori Incantatum and kill Barney Crunch, Jr?

I did very much enjoy the added scene of dance lessons and the slight change to the Bathroom scene.


----------



## Mark Chance (Nov 30, 2005)

The whole evil scheme didn't make sense. The bad guys should've just bonked Harry on the head and kidnapped him. Then, right after slicing his arm, they should've put a bullet in his skull rather than placing on the ridiculously slow-moving dipping mechanism. The ending was weak. "Ultimate evil stalks the land, intent on destroying us all, especially you, Potter! Have a nice summer. Don't forget to write."

 :\


----------



## Desdichado (Nov 30, 2005)

Mark Chance said:
			
		

> I'm accustomed to my tastes differing from those of an 8-year-old.



After a few years of seeing your comments on movies, I'm accustomed to your tastes differing from the majority opinion here too.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Nov 30, 2005)

Mark Chance said:
			
		

> The whole evil scheme didn't make sense. The bad guys should've just bonked Harry on the head and kidnapped him. Then, right after slicing his arm, they should've put a bullet in his skull rather than placing on the ridiculously slow-moving dipping mechanism. The ending was weak. "Ultimate evil stalks the land, intent on destroying us all, especially you, Potter! Have a nice summer. Don't forget to write."
> 
> :\





So should Dumbledore and the "good guys" have sent Potter and crew off to fight Voldemort at thier advanced ages of 14?  They don't want Potter fighting Voldemort or any of the adult and far more experienced Death Eaters if at all possible. One contant subplot of the series is that they are trying to shield Harry and protect him from Voldemort by hiding him and not telling him everything he wants to know, something that will come out even more next movie.  Dumbledore would like the children's lives to go on as normal as possible while the adults work on trying to convince everyone that Voldemort is indeed back and organizing resistance to him.  School is over, so you send them home to thier wizard parents to care for.  What else did you expect them to do?   The fallout of this is dealt with next movie though, as will the relationship between Voldemort and Potter.  And you will find out why Potter keeps being sent to his horrible Dursley family in the summer.

And Wizards never use muggle weaponry such as Guns.  Plus Vodemort wants to destroy Harry and do it methodicaly so he can gloat over Harry as he dies.


----------



## BrooklynKnight (Nov 30, 2005)

Just curious, but has anyone seen that clip flying around the net of the actress who plays Fluer Delacuer. 

Apparently she appeared in a french movie.....

I'll let you figure out for yourselves. Her names Clemence Poesy.


----------



## orbitalfreak (Nov 30, 2005)

BrooklynKnight said:
			
		

> Just curious, but has anyone seen that clip flying around the net of the actress who plays Fluer Delacuer.
> 
> Apparently she appeared in a french movie.....
> 
> I'll let you figure out for yourselves. Her names Clemence Poesy.




Yes.  Very not-grandma-safe material.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Dec 1, 2005)

Just saw the movie tonight, it was okay, but sort of disappointing.


			
				TanisFrey said:
			
		

> HP-GOF Thank goodness that did not change the placment or look of anything, still dont like the look of Prof. Flick.



The nazi gnome? 


> liked how they shorted the world cup and after math and the arivial of the other schools.      why are the two school are totaly one sex or the other?



I hated their entrances, flipping and posing and... they had the feel of a traveling circus come to town.


> The dragon task was too long and could have been shortened to allow more normal pacing.  And she should have other eggs to protect other than the golden egg.



The mention of the dragon's all being female and nesting was cut. In the book, Harry has to lure the dragon away to swoop in and get it. In the movie, he basically just flee's.
How much time did Harry have to loop back and grab the egg, instead of flying away from it? They had to have him "defeat" the dragon, rather than just get the egg?

Also, the tournament is supposed to be watched, to insure SOME level of safety, but the dragon is flying around ON THE SCHOOL!


> AND WOULD hurt to add 10-30 Seconds of time to explaine Priori Incantatum



IIRC, Harry tries a disarm spell, which Voldemort rebuffs with a spell of his own, before they lock wands on a subsequent spell... so the Priori Incantatum effect is meaningless in the movie, given that the two wands didn't lock the first time.



> and kill Barney Crunch, Jr?



Why did they give him verataserum, to ask where the real Moody was? (and showing him at the bottom with a "yeah, I'm fine" was bleh) There wasn't a whole lot of plot exposition.



> I did very much enjoy the added scene of dance lessons and the slight change to the Bathroom scene.




I enjoyed:
The graveyard scene: had a good eerie feeling to it, and was fun.
The underwater: though the changes were bad, having him attacked right after almost making it to the surface was eh.
Fred, George and Ginny: all fun in their ways.
The Unforgivable Curse Class: the dancing bug was fun, the change of mood when he makes to drown it was cool.
Giving Nevill more stuff to do was good also. I still think he should be fatter though, can't they make him chubbier? 

Stuff I didn't like
Voldemort didn't look sinister and mysterious, he looked like an alien out of Star Trek. I did like his exit from the cauldron, but the figure himself was bleh. Plus, when he said "love", it just sounded wrong.

Moody: he was one of my favorites in the book, and in the movie he was lacking. The swigs from the bottle are polyjuice, but also because the real Moody is paranoid in extreme. In the movie, he looked like an alcoholic. That whole tongue thing? That was just dumb IMO. The repeated bludgeoning clues of "polyjuice potion in the pipes" and such were wierd. More time should have been spent endearing him to the audience as a mentor than leaving clues for his falseness. Also, Crouch Jr's hatred of "betrayer" Death Eaters never came up.

The start was way too fast. Dream was fine, but then BAM, World Cup, BAM World Cup Night, BAM! Hogwarts express.
Ron apologizing to Harry in the middle of the common room was just awkward, in a very odd choice of a scene to insert.


Changes from the book I'm mixed on;
No Elves/SPEW: I think the Crouch elf was needed, but the lack of plot exposition makes that meaningless I suppose.
Crouch Jr: his early appearance was a bit off setting. His later appearance in the books is more of a surprise, which is fine.
No Ron Jealousy: I didn't care much for this in the book, so didn't miss it in the movie.
Karkarov never really seemed like much of a red herring in the movie, but perhaps that's because I've read the book.


----------

