The Official Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire Movie Thread [Archive] - Page 2

View Full Version : The Official Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire Movie Thread

Pages : 1 [2]

Bunnyzilla

11-19-2005, 03:25 PM

meh, it was ok. they rushed it WAY to much. my biggest dissapointment is that we didnt get to see the QWC. :(

Airknight

11-19-2005, 06:18 PM

just saw it, quite disappointed really~ they cut out most of the important bit: QWC, the end bit where barty junior explains everything etc... i also think some of the characters dont fit their parts (ie madame maxime is supposed to be pretty but she turned out to be really ugly in the movie). and more but i dont feel like posting all right now~

btw, did they mention ludo bagman at all? i dont remember if he showed up or not~

InEviTabLe.SiN

11-19-2005, 07:23 PM

Kirarakim

11-19-2005, 11:16 PM

I am surprised so many people disliked this movie I loved it and thought it was the best one yet (I really disliked movie 3). I was disappointed things were left out but I knew they couldn't ft everything in so I was happy that all the important stuff was left intact. I also thought the casting was much better in this movie then the last.

pineapple4brains

11-20-2005, 01:31 AM

It was bad.

Actually it was okay but not good.

They skipped so much I mean like with how he get's his broom against the dragon and all...

each movie will be worse while each book gets longer.

InEviTabLe.SiN

11-20-2005, 02:23 AM

It was bad.

Actually it was okay but not good.

They skipped so much I mean like with how he get's his broom against the dragon and all...

each movie will be worse while each book gets longer.
They had to skip a lot. If they included every tinsy winsy bit of information you'd be sitting there for several hours or there would have to be 2 movies.

Airknight

11-20-2005, 06:42 AM

I'll tell you if Ludo shows up when I go to see it. He probably did, but because the movie was so long you forgot about it.
nevermind it~ they really cut him out, i looked on some website and his name wasnt there~ they probably just mention the name when dumbly announce they are holding the tournament...

RedEyes Black Dragon

11-20-2005, 08:32 AM

I'm going to see it today! Yay! :cool:

sixersballernum3

11-20-2005, 09:25 AM

Landstar 01

11-20-2005, 09:36 AM

It was bad.

Actually it was okay but not good.

They skipped so much I mean like with how he get's his broom against the dragon and all...

each movie will be worse while each book gets longer.

They didn't skip that out. You must have been bored, or not paying attention, because he definitely points his wand at the castle, and says "Accio Firebolt". It's just fast-paced, and not very loud. You really should pay attention.

Airknight

11-20-2005, 10:53 AM

They didn't skip that out. You must have been bored, or not paying attention, because he definitely points his wand at the castle, and says "Accio Firebolt". It's just fast-paced, and not very loud. You really should pay attention.
yeah, but i think they did it badly~ in the book, it descrip harry didnt hear or care anything and point the wand at the castle at once, and nothing happen for the next few seconds then his fire bolt showed up~

i think they should do it like a slow motion way, or do it like when he came out, the sounds shut down and we can only hear his heartbeat, then he shouted out the spell and etc~~~~

magnumcyclonex

11-20-2005, 11:38 AM

I missed the 3rd movie, but watched the 4th last night. Let's just say that the girls (Hermoine, Cho and Fleur) were the only good things about the movie for me, as well as the scenes with Fred and George goofing off and the forbidden arts class.

Seriously, the movie was way too short. I spent a long time reading the book and absorbing every little detail but despite the spectacular special effects, the movie lacked substance. 2 hours doesn't do the book justice.

Hero of Time

11-20-2005, 11:49 AM

brndnfrtg

11-20-2005, 12:05 PM

It was closer to 3 hours than it was 2 hours.

I was about to say "ONLY 2!!"

This book was the biggest one. they should get better if the 7 is small (yah right).

magnumcyclonex

11-20-2005, 12:07 PM

It was closer to 3 hours than it was 2 hours.

It was around 2.30 hours. Still, I've made my point. Hopefully, the next one will be better, longer and produced/released within the next year from now.

Landstar 01

11-20-2005, 02:22 PM

I heard on an interview with Daniel Radcliffe that they start filming for Order of the Phoenix in February 2006. The film should be released in May 2007. They're aiming to release them every 18 months.

sixersballernum3

11-20-2005, 03:46 PM

For those (I've seen a few) saying this is the longest book, it isn't.

Order of the Phoenix is larger than Half Blood Prince, which is larger than Goblet of Fire. So, it's the third largest. The next book has a lot more to cover (Although I must say OotP was my least favorite book).

What I want to know is how long the current actors will stay around. Draco already looked like he could pass at a bar, so I don't see how they can stretch some of these characters through all 7 books, if they do in fact make 7 films (which, now that they've started, they probably should).

pineapple4brains

11-20-2005, 06:34 PM

sixersballernum3

11-20-2005, 07:31 PM

didn't they have somethingin the book where he learns how to do that?

I believe the Accio spell is common knowledge. You use it to summon tyhings to you all the time, I believe. Like, if you want a book from around the corner or something.

WildWill

11-20-2005, 09:03 PM

Well, we just got back from the movie.

I liked it. OK so I've liked them all. What can I say? I think they're all well made, it's obvious that everyone involved wants to make a quality product (but let's never forget it IS product and not art).

Michael Gambon as Dumbledore isn't working for me at all. Nope. I miss Richard Harris. Yup.

Beyond that, everything worked. It was a MITE too long, but never boring.

Hero of Time

11-20-2005, 09:08 PM

Michael Gambon as Dumbledore isn't working for me at all. Nope. I miss Richard Harris. Yup.

My dad and I also feel the same way. I like his soft vice and his gentle look. This new Dumbledore is too loud. His voice also gets on my nerves.

Black Paladin

11-20-2005, 10:21 PM

My dad and I also feel the same way. I like his soft vice and his gentle look. This new Dumbledore is too loud. His voice also gets on my nerves.

I agree. even though I haven't seen it yet, from what I saw from the commercials, he looks.....meaner.

yugiohtiger

11-20-2005, 10:40 PM

Best one of the 4 movies imo. It was funny, romantic, action-packed, and horror-ish at times. Nice shrinkage of a big book.

Yami no Riku

11-20-2005, 11:44 PM

I'm gonna go see it Wednesday.

Eh... the movies in general suck. I wish they had just gone and given us a 4 hour movie to fit in everything for the previous books. Then again, they only have what, 120 pages of script compared to 300-700 in a book? Yeah...

InEviTabLe.SiN

11-21-2005, 02:01 AM

superman

11-21-2005, 07:56 AM

I got to see the movie yesterday, and it was really good! Voldemort needs to go to a freak show or something lol! Now is when the movies are getting better.

InEviTable.Sin: Yeah next movie is release in 2007 & half blood prince at 2008. Which I think the last one comes out in 2010. They need time for the characters look more mature for the films.

wms99

11-21-2005, 10:40 AM

I saw the movie Friday night, 10:35pm. My wife and I took 8 teenagers.

I thought in the earlier movies Dumbledore was always calm, cool, and in control. This movie has him more as being caught off guard and loosing his cool.

Snape wasn't mean enough. I didn't end up hating him like other movies.
Lord V was right on the money. Perfect.

Overall, it felt like they picked the 5 or 6 big events from the book and made major scenes with them, and strung them together with little short scenes.

I did like the movie, but wish I could watch a directors cut, or extended version.

necrofear

11-21-2005, 01:42 PM

wms99

11-21-2005, 01:48 PM

Why did the death eaters hoods look like a racist groups?

Um, just a guess, but maybe because they are a bunch of RACISTS!
Think mud-blood.

ORACLEPAGER1029

11-21-2005, 02:40 PM

I hope they do make extended editions for fans' sake. The Death Eaters do look like KKK with black hoods.

Ace of Spades

11-21-2005, 04:05 PM

Far too rushed, but what can you do? What needed to be shown was shown and what was inconsequential was cut. I agree with most of the cuts.

I've gotta say I like how the First Task was handled. It was just cool to watch Harry and the Horntail's dogfight around the castle. The Second Task had some fun effects, and it was generally accurate and exciting. The Third Task was a letdown, though. I know it's not supposed to be the true climax, but I would've at least liked to see Harry take on the Sphinx or a Skrewt.

I enjoyed the Yule Ball scene. The rock band was a bit out of place, and I would've liked to see the Wierd Sisters, but overral a good piece of work.

Brandon Gleeson was spot on as Moody. At first, I thought that he wouldn't be able to pull it off, but he did it with flying colors. The Ferret scene was even funnier on film than in the books.

I would've liked to see the full Quidditch World Cup, but what was shown of it was excellent.

Oh yeah, Voldemort. I don't know. He seemed to be accurate to the book, but I expected him to be more menacing and intimidating. The duel was handled well, even though I never liked the idea of Priori Incantatem. The scene where Crouch Jr. was revealed was also quite good.

Rating: A-
I enjoyed it. Most of the "review" was nitpicking, but otherwise, I really liked it.

_Badfish

11-21-2005, 05:51 PM

JUst got back, loved it. I agree with the dumbledore thing, just ew...

InEviTabLe.SiN

11-23-2005, 02:35 AM

Does anyone know approximately how much it cost to make the GoF Movie? Sorry if this has already been posted and answered.

TheNinjaCenterfold

11-23-2005, 08:33 PM

I saw it. It was cool, but they cut so much out. Cho was hot. :p . Oh, and weren't the girls from that one school supposed to be like, another species or something?

Busterslash35

11-23-2005, 09:24 PM

i just saw it today, and though imo there were some bad parts, there were some good parts.

throughout the movie, i felt it was rushed. a lot of the scenes could've been done better, but that's just imo. trying to be as unbiased as possible, i think a lot of the scenes were made assuming the audience saw the first three, or better yet, has read all the books.

also, i didn't like how at parts in the movie, something would happen, then explain it afterward. i didn't like that it kept happening constantly. i would think it would confuse a non hp fan for a bit.

as for the characters.. i really liked fred and george in this movie. can't wait til their grand exit next movie. hermione's character seemed to be in a neverending pms. also, it felt that their intereactions were more real this movie. maybe it's just me? neville's character.. eh. i like moody. even though he's still pirate moody, i liked him in the movie. snape seemed a bit out of character. voldemort was just silly.

i'm sure this goes for a lot of you but.. i miss the original dumbledore. =( the new one just doesn't feel right...

i, too, wanted to see a bit more of the qwc and how pro quidditch players played compared to the hogwarts games that we don't seem to be getting anymore.

cho and fleur were both pretty.
to answer ninjacenterfold: i think you're mixing up veela and the beauxbaton students. fleur is part veela iirc. i can't remmeber if veela actually went to the school itself, though.

umm, that's all the review/critique i can pull out of my head at the moment.

RefLeX

11-23-2005, 09:47 PM

i luved this movie saw it daY 1

MartialArtsFreak

11-23-2005, 09:48 PM

I really did like Richard Harris as Dumbledore. It's really too bad he passed away. He was quiet, and calm, and seemed exactly as Dumbledore should. He really would have been good in Order of the Phoenix and Prince, because anyone who has seen other Harris movies know that while he can be quiet, he can also be very loud.

Secret Squirrel

11-24-2005, 10:13 PM

I thought this movie was very good. Some initial reactions:

-Half the guys in the movie looked like Johnny Ramone. C'mon! Cut your hair or something.
-Mood swings were abrupt, although I guess it's important, since the movie is about teenagers. It's just a little annoying becuase the directors set up so well the idea of having everyone, especially Ron, pissed at Harry. And then they throw it away!
-The ending was weak, as usual. Sure there's drama in a handful of scenes at the end, but the movie gives no inclination of "to be continued" which is very effectively used in the books. The ending kinda came crashing down, especially the Moody scene. He wakes up after being left in this case for months to say he's ok to Dumbledore? Wtf?
-As has been said, the "new" Dumbledore cannot compete with the original.
-I didn't really understand the whole terrorist scene at the World Cup. I guess those scenes are pretty hard to put on, so they didn't want to do one for this movie. This was somewhat disappointing.

-They selected the right facts. It was disappointing that the elf was left out, but it's just one less confusing thing for the movie, I guess. I didn't really mind it. But they did stuff like mentioning a portkey at the beginning (which was used again at the end of movie).
-Many of the scenes were good. The ball, Harry attempting to ask girls out, the Prefect's bathtubs, and the graveyard scene were all well done.
-There was a lot of good acting. Snape was great, as usual. Also, Ron is bearable.
-The first 2 tournaments scenes were VERY good.
-Moody's scene with Malfloy was great.
-The important girls actually looked nice. O.O

Overall, pretty good show.

Perfect Cell

11-25-2005, 09:40 PM

Well, my expectations for this movie were initially low as with all the Harry Potter movies - as a result I'm never dissapointed. Sure they always seemed entertaining to me as a fan, and it was always fun to hang out with my friends afterwords and complain about what they cut out. This time around however I didn't have the heart to nit pick a thing. I was actually a little devastated - A Harry Potter MOVIE impressed me. None of you really know me in person, so I'll just fill you in: I'm a snob and a critic - and I LIKED this movie. The other movies were definitily designed to entertain, mostly for little ones and fans. But this one caught me off guard. Holy Mother of Hell!, I said to myself, did I just laugh at one of their jokes? Am I struggling to find the horrid child actors within these more serious ones? The answer, though a blow to my pride, was yes.

What I had come to expect from a Harry Potter movie was delivered of coarse: The effects were outstanding, the action was fast, the magic was present. But acting wise - (I'm going to use the characters names because some of the actors names I can't recall and I want to be consistent.)

HARRY POTTER - in the movies previous to this one Daniel was trying, yeah but his acting truthfully made me cringe. On the contrary this time around he seemed conscious of his surroudnings and my eyes actually stung as he was crying over Cedrics body. This Harry Potter seemed prepared to tackle an evil Lord Voldemort rather than defend his vacant house with paint cans from Daniel Stern. In other words he's grown since his Azkaban adventure as a child actor.

RON WEASLEY - the real shock here was he had more than two major lines, unlike in Azkaban when you push his tummy and he says "Bloody Hell!" and "When did you get here?" Now, I won't say he made as big a jump as Radcliffe but I didn't get red from embaressment whenever he made an appearence. But I will say this: Rupert managed to piss me off when he didn't believe Harry, though I suspect I would've cared more if there wasn't someone behind me making crude gay jokes.

HERMIONE GRANGER - I was relieved to see that Emma gave to me what she usually did, a good but not award worthy performance. She was very in character the entire time and carried all the subtlties of a good Hermione. And thank the gods she had changed since the Hermione of Azkaban, a Hermione that lifted Harry with one hand while being swung around by a gigantic tree, tossed him through the crevice with alarming accuracy, landed on him jutting her breasts forward and moaned an apology. Yes I'm exagerrating but I love to rant about that part. Sorry if I made her performance sound unsattisfactory - I truly enjoyed her most of the three.

Hagrid - perfectly goofy and hopeless as he should've been.
Snape - though his scenes are short Alan makes me smirk in evil pleasure whenever his greasy character glides onto the screen.
McGonnagul - dissparoving and worried, good as always.
Crouch Junior - pitifully out of character but as far as acting goes, fine.
Crouch - also out of character, his acting wasn't as redeemable.
Black - as good as 20 seconds of ashes can be.
Draco - not on screen enough but while he was on screen he was his regular out of character self. As I constantly rant about, all four movies portray him as a Disney villains side kick.
Crabbe and Goyle - horrid...but considering they are just Crabbe and Goyle it doesn't matter.
Moody - vastly fun to watch. He carries himself just right and his simple line in the movie, "Teachin'" when asked by McGonnagul what he was doing still makes me laugh.
Weasley Twins - good old entertaining, had me smiling everytime.
Neville - very nice, my eyes were waxing wet when he watched the CRUCIO curse.
Cedric - he was very nice as the good ole' boy perfect student he was supposed to be. Flocked by friends he didn't seem to know and apologetic about the badges. Nice nice.
Amos - small role but heartbreaking at the end.
Fluer - not many lines, but apparently Cuaron isn't the only one who enjoys some fine underage booty. Sorry that was a cheap shot ... seriously I loved Hermiones tight jeans. But anyway, as odd as this complaint may sound...not annoying enough. Weird...
Maxime - not elegant enough is all I can muster about her.
Igor - ok, I suppose - but he seemed hardly there.
Krum -rigid, cold, akward on land - the Krum I expected...but not what I wanted. As I predicted they missed the soft side of Krum that is hinted upon in the book. He just wasn't present at all.
Skeeter - good but not the fowl woman she was supposed to be. Seriously..we woudn't mind if you made the annoying characters...annoying!
Lucious - aristocratic jerk, perfect.
Voldemort - he was described by many here as silly. Sorry but I didn't catch that part...he was perfectly sinister. Maybe not as sadistic as other roles Ralph as accomplished but quite good enough for me. His whole look however...could've been improved upon but I won't lay eggs over it.
Radiohead - yes, Radiohead was the rockband playing during the ball if you didn't know.
Patil sisters - nice, though their unison "hello Harrys" were getting annoying. They were pissed just enough at being ignored also I noted.
Cho - very sweet. I found that this was the Cho I knew, not the made up Cho everyone has formed in their heads. NOTE TO EVERYONE: CHO IS NOT A *****! Thankfully someone noticed that also...she just cries alot.

Acting is what I truly care about but a brief review of everything can be managed. Um..."good" and you can quote me on that one. OVERALL ranking out of 10 with two decimal points....

7.45 / 10.00 - above average - go see it!

BTW - HEY POJO, LONG TIME!

Busterslash35

11-25-2005, 09:50 PM

Voldemort - he was described by many here as silly. Sorry but I didn't catch that part...he was perfectly sinister. Maybe not as sadistic as other roles Ralph as accomplished but quite good enough for me. His whole look however...could've been improved upon but I won't lay eggs over it.
Radiohead - yes, Radiohead was the rockband playing during the ball if you didn't know.
voldy's looks is what mostly influenced my view of him as silly. eh. way to be shallow, me.

but i didn't know about the radiohead trivia. interesting.

also, i just now found out that myrtle's actor is about 40 years old. making the bathtub scene all the more creepy.

Ryusaki

11-26-2005, 04:54 AM

Since everyone else's doing them:

+Hungarian Horntail was excellent
+The younger actors were much better
+Moody was good
+Darker theme made it much better

-Way too much skipped (Rita being an animagus, Bagman, other dragons, Sphinx)
-Went way too fast (let's go to the Quidditch world cup-Oh sorry, the Quidditch world cup's finished, let's go to Hogwarts!)
-Daniel Radcliffe is still a bit meh
-Often funny
-Richard Harris was a much better Dumbledore

brndnfrtg

11-26-2005, 05:11 AM

Awesome review Perfect Cell!!!

Now I'll have to make one when I go to see it on monday.

Black Paladin

11-26-2005, 02:02 PM

I jst saw it yesterday. I thought it was ok. they could't have made it even longer or else they'd have to have built in toilets.

the only part I want to see again is the Hungarian Horntail and the entrances of the other two schools(can't remember the names) into Hogwarts

Yami no Riku

11-26-2005, 02:51 PM

I just saw it last night. I was disappointed in most respects. Here we go:

Pros:
-Emma Watson was hot.
-Voldemort was just as I pictured him with the snake face and all.
-Voldemort looked hella cool when he was forcing Harry to stand up and bow and everything.
-The school entrances were awesome.
-The Beauxbatons students were too hot to be French girls, I'm sorry.

Cons:
-They never explained why Krum attacked Fleur and Cedric.
-The whole Harry crying scene was too forced.
-Dumbledore sucks now with this new guy. He seems American, not British.
-They chose a whore for Fleur. Look at her other movies, particularly 'those' kinds of movies... Shame on you, WB.
-The Patils were annoying as hell.
-They didn't make fun of Ron enough.
-The movie jumped around too much to make sense to the average person who had not read the books.
-Snape was just an ass, he wasn't cruel. They better make him seem evil in 5, otherwise nobody is going to believe he takes out Dumbledore in 6.
-Weren't there more Death Eaters present in the Voldemort scene?
-I didn't understand 1 f'n word Cho said the entire movie except for "Harry?"
-The whole 'Moody = fake!!1! OMG!" thing was too short.
-I don't recall seeing Ludo Bagwood anywhere in the first scenes at the World Cup. And they could at least have shown us the Veela at the World Cup, and the fake gold falling down everywhere.
-All in all, if you didn't read the book you were confused, and if you did, you were disappointed.

Secret Squirrel

11-26-2005, 04:23 PM

-The movie jumped around too much to make sense to the average person who had not read the books.
-All in all, if you didn't read the book you were confused, and if you did, you were disappointed.
Yeah but who would see the movie without reading the books? Really.. it's Harry Freaking Potter. I could understand people seeing LotR without reading (shame on them) but HP is probably the easiest book ever to read. There's AMPLE time to read the books in between the movies. Plus since you've read the books, you can't really be a judge of that. :p

Mongonagal's demonstration was mortifying enough for Ron. I think that's part of what made his character better.. the fact that the movie didn't spend hours trying to make fun of him.

maoKaiba_Sarah

11-27-2005, 09:29 PM

I watched it last week and it wasn't exactly that high for me (CoS is better imo) i hardly think it was dark but i saw this funny joke on why it needed the ratingonion (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/42613) it was on mugglenet and i could not believe how many people didn't get the joke it pathetic. GoF just didnt do it for me without the whole plot outside of trying to be a thriller or a dark one at that

InEviTabLe.SiN

11-29-2005, 04:42 AM

The GoF Movie is nearly going to hit the theatres! Just two more days! Me and me mates might jig school just to watch it. :p Just kidding, we'll get caught. You have any idea how strict teachers are over here? (I'm in Australia, by the way)

Shadowstep

11-29-2005, 07:36 AM

well, I was quite shocked at this movie, and at the sheer amount it left out, more or less the whole backsory, they cut out dobby and winky, the whole of SPEW, and after they set up the world cup match beautifully, they just cut straight to the end in the tent? I mean if you were going to go to the trouble of making a stadium and eveything, you may as well make the freaking match! I still think Radcliffe is a crap potter, but theres not much anyone can do about that. it was a fine film, but as an adaptation it was crap. I dont really think dumbledore was very good either, but the old one died didnt he?
also, one thing that got to me was that they toned it down from the book (Its not the satanic verses or anything) I mean when moody was doing the unforgivable curses, in the books he does them on students? whereas in the films WB gets a social conscience, and does it on animals instead

ZanarkandAce

11-29-2005, 12:36 PM

Actually, I think that in the book, he only did the imperious curse on the students. It wouldn't be a good thing for "Moody" to do the other curses on the students. Although I did like the fact that he turned Malfoy into a white weasel, and was throwing him around and stuffed him down Goyle(?)'s pants...

I was dissapointed with all the stuff that they left out too. No telling about how Harry survived the duel with the Dark Lord. Their wands being made of the same core. No mention of Veela, as Flour(sp)'s grandmother was one. I wanted to see the quiddich match, but they led up to it, then moved right to the end... No tormenting muggles after the world cup... No Sphinx in the maze, it lacked a lot. As Shadowstep mentioned, they didn't have Doby give harry the gillyweed... I was a little dissapointed with all that the movie lacked, but I was also impressed at a lot of it. Voldemort looked pretty much like I imagined, except a little less scally...

BerserkerAzn

11-29-2005, 04:05 PM

1) Moody only performed the Imperius Curse on the students in the book. That's because it's more or less the least damaging demonstration as opposed to excruciating pain...and death. >_<

2) I'm actually glad they left SPEW and Dobby/Winky out. Those were just to provide an explanation for how Bartemius Crouch Jr. lived and some stuff about how wizard's need to change their perception of other magical beings, which is most likely a powerful point of the final book. The movie didn't really need it and flowed pretty well without those specific parts.

3) Though I'm still ashamed of their portrayal of the giddy-as-a-schoolgirl Voldemort, and the Ku Kl...er..Death Eaters. -_-; I could actually enjoy rest of the movie if it wasn't for these specific parts.

pineapple4brains

11-29-2005, 05:00 PM

Blankauctions

11-29-2005, 10:59 PM

Did anyone See Jay Leno tonight?

It was a parody of Harry Potter... played by Gilbert Godfrey (the guy with the annoying voice) - it was hilarious ^_^

neowater

11-30-2005, 12:18 PM

I mean when moody was doing the unforgivable curses, in the books he does them on students? whereas in the films WB gets a social conscience, and does it on animals instead

in the book he does the curses on spiders.

DreamSpell

11-30-2005, 02:51 PM

3) Though I'm still ashamed of their portrayal of the giddy-as-a-schoolgirl Voldemort, and the Ku Kl...er..Death Eaters. -_-; I could actually enjoy rest of the movie if it wasn't for these specific parts.
Yea, I wasn't too happy about the hoods either. I know they're like practically the Wizarding World equivilent and all, but still. Their masks were really cool though, and not looking like Phantom of the Opera rejects either lol. I want a mask like that. :D

Voldermort had a right to be happy about the new body. I wouldn't call him giddyy-as-a-schoolgirl though. I loved the almost Golumness hint to him.

ZanarkandAce

11-30-2005, 03:30 PM

in the book he does the curses on spiders.
He did the Crucio and the Avada Kedavara on the spiders, but he did the Imperious on the students. I remember that I think he made either Neville, or someone else who wasn't in the best of shape, do backflips and stuff. The others, he of course didn't do on anyone but the spiders.

BerserkerAzn

11-30-2005, 05:00 PM

Gonk

12-01-2005, 12:29 PM

>_> Alright people he did ALL the spells on 3 different spiders. The NEXT class he put them all under the Imperius. Neville did backflips, Seamus or someone hopped like a frog or squirrel and sang the national anthem, etc, etc. Harry was the only one to throw it off.
Yeah.

But in the film when Moody used Avada Kedavra on the last spider, it looked to me as though he's killed it by just jabbing it, not by using the curse. l:-/

Retain

12-02-2005, 11:52 PM

Pretty good movie. Sure they cut some parts off but I can live with it, after all I wouldn't want a movie thats like 4 hours long >.>.

ToonCommander

12-03-2005, 02:06 AM

I think they have done over kill with the movies now.

sixersballernum3

12-03-2005, 09:22 AM

I think they have done over kill with the movies now.

What, by continuing to make them?

darkphoenix88

12-03-2005, 01:41 PM

I liked the movie but i reall hate the ending but what do u expect there need to be future ones... still it was quite good.

InEviTabLe.SiN

12-03-2005, 07:36 PM

Pretty good movie. Sure they cut some parts off but I can live with it, after all I wouldn't want a movie thats like 4 hours long >.>.
It was 2 hours and 37 minutes long. That's such a bummer. They could have made it 3 hours at least, like the LotR movies.

Anyway, GoF came out a few days ago (1st December, Thursday) over here in Australia and my friends all went to watch it straight after school. (School finishes at 2.40pm on Thursdays) I didn't get to go. :( They said it was awesome and that Voldemort looked like an alien.

DementedMisfitBoy

12-03-2005, 10:41 PM

About the Death Eaters looking like a certain American supremicist group...well, maybe that's what happens when a British director takes over. It may not be as familiar over in the UK as it is over here, so it might have a different effect on non-American audiences...which is the rest of the world.

On the other hand, it may just be that the hoods were meant to just look like robes with pointed hats already attached. Again, maybe from a non-American viewpoint, that might be what it looks like.

RedEyes Black Dragon

12-04-2005, 08:24 AM

1. Why didn't he have a hood?

2. If one was to look at a still picture of him, one would get the hibby-jibbys.

InEviTabLe.SiN

12-08-2005, 11:36 PM

I watched GoF last night. It was pretty good, I give it a rating of 8/10. I would have liked if they had these missing parts and subplots:

- A longer scene of when Harry is at Ron's place, and you get to see Charlie and Bill.
- To actually see them play the Quidditch World Cup Game and to see the Leprechauns and Veelas. If the game was actually shown, imagine how awesome it would have been. (The stadium and all were fantastic! And when the players flew in, it was such an awesome feeling!)
- The House-Elfs and Hogwarts Kitchen. You never get to see them tickle the peach to get into the kitchen and visit the Elfs.
- The Third Task should have been longer.
- Cho Chang and Rita Skeeter should have played a bigger role.
- Voldemort should have looked scarier.
- What is with the Death Eaters' Uniform policy?

However I quite liked the movie anyway.

User#27

01-01-2006, 01:27 AM

There are far too many positive reactions on this thread. I need to whine some to balance things:

... Are we absolutely sure we can't resurect Richard Harris? I mean, Dumbledore was tolerable in the 3rd movie but in this one... does the actor have the faintest idea how the character should be played? Bellowing Harry's name like he toilet papered the Slytherin common room, that ridiculous scene with the teachers deciding to use Harry as bait.... that is not Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore.

Plenty of charecters screwed around with or simply erased. The Weasley family seems to have mislaid 3 of their chlidren, house elves will not be featured nearly so prominently, all the boys mysteriously disappeared from Beauxbatons etc. None of that is particularly important though I did miss meeting Bill and Charlie.

Following the tradition of movie 3 the Ron Hermione relationship is spotlighted to a degree completely unlike the orgional.

Ahh well. It was enjoyable enough and quite honestly the only really damaging part was the gross misrepresentation of Dumbledore. Still, that alone is worth whining about.

orange peel

01-01-2006, 06:26 PM

Wasnt the movie pg-13? why? no blood except for the end when he cuts of his hand.

Darth Payne

01-01-2006, 11:59 PM

I just watched this and the Chronicles of Narnia today. It was pretty good. Voldemort and Dumbledore sucked though. A lot. And the ending didn't have Crouch Jr.'s entire story. And that was like the most important part.

w/e 8/10. Would give it a 7.5, but being a Harry Potter movie and the hot girls give it a bonus. :cool:

nobodys99

01-02-2006, 09:06 AM

a good movie it was no doubt

but pg 13 rating?

whats up with that?

no swearing and hardly any blood

Darth Payne

01-02-2006, 03:09 PM

Maybe the sort of "maturity" at the Yule Ball? And maybe they thought it was scary or something.

orange peel

01-03-2006, 06:38 PM

Is It Worth watching then? It's 7th week running and its recieved more money then king kong , the family stone, and Cheaper By The Dozen 2 combined.

If Not, pm me the spoiler plz.

Darth Payne

01-03-2006, 06:57 PM

-They chose a whore for Fleur. Look at her other movies, particularly 'those' kinds of movies... Shame on you, WB.
Yeah. Especially "those." >_> <_< >_> <_< >_> <_<

I really didn't think they'd use someone like her for a Harry Potter movie....

My review:

Harry: He was pretty good. Nothing wrong with him...It's just that there was nothing great about his acting. Just got the point across. Him and Ron's fight was pretty good. But they never explained too much why.

Ron: Yeah. The chicks don't dig your hair. Geez

Hermione: Hot. She was pretty good, but didn't do much besides the Yule Ball. I loved her in that scene. Favorite scene. Really did well.

Voldemort: Yeah. I can see what you guys are talking about. He sucked. Seriously. The world's most evil character doesn't act that retarded. Sorry.

Dumbledore: Him, Snape, and Voldemort better change A LOT in the 5th movie, or the 6th is either gonna fall apart, or turn out retarded. They just can't get across the point that Dumbledore's patience and calm is near infinite.

Snape: Needed to do more because he becomes important later on. Well the 5th can fix that. Better fix that.

Cho: Her apology was very sincere and made Harry feel like a piece of crap. It was good. Her accent made her odd though.

Amos D.: Very good IMO. He seemed like a normal unimportant guy at first. Typical dad-ish guy. Than at the end. OMG. It was so sad. I really felt for him.

Cedric: Pretty good, but didn't get the Hufflepuff qualities out in him too much.

Wormtail: Not even close to being meek enough.

Crouch Jr.: Didn't explain him. Can't really say how his character was, but his acting was good.

Crouch Sr. Dumb arse old man.

Ludo Bagman: The goblins got to him early.

Sirius: Perfect. No mistakes at ALL. But only because he was a pile of ash for less than a minute.

And yes its worth seeing orange peel.

orange peel

01-03-2006, 07:24 PM

Yeah. Especially "those." >_> <_< >_> <_< >_> <_<

I really didn't think they'd use someone like her for a Harry Potter movie....

My review:

Harry: He was pretty good. Nothing wrong with him...It's just that there was nothing great about his acting. Just got the point across. Him and Ron's fight was pretty good. But they never explained too much why.

Ron: Yeah. The chicks don't dig your hair. Geez

Hermione: Hot. She was pretty good, but didn't do much besides the Yule Ball. I loved her in that scene. Favorite scene. Really did well. (yeah, i agree a lot.)

Voldemort: Yeah. I can see what you guys are talking about. He sucked. Seriously. The world's most evil character doesn't act that retarded. Sorry.

Dumbledore: Him, Snape, and Voldemort better change A LOT in the 5th movie, or the 6th is either gonna fall apart, or turn out retarded. They just can't get across the point that Dumbledore's patience and calm is near infinite.

Snape: Needed to do more because he becomes important later on. Well the 5th can fix that. Better fix that.

Cho: Her apology was very sincere and made Harry feel like a piece of crap. It was good. Her accent made her odd though.

Amos D.: Very good IMO. He seemed like a normal unimportant guy at first. Typical dad-ish guy. Than at the end. OMG. It was so sad. I really felt for him.

Cedric: Pretty good, but didn't get the Hufflepuff qualities out in him too much.

Wormtail: Not even close to being meek enough.

Crouch Jr.: Didn't explain him. Can't really say how his character was, but his acting was good.

Crouch Sr. Dumb arse old man.

Ludo Bagman: The goblins got to him early.

Sirius: Perfect. No mistakes at ALL. But only because he was a pile of ash for less than a minute.

And yes its worth seeing orange peel.

well, first of all, sirius isnt perfect. JKR givs you enuff pictures of him in the book to get a clear image. he should BRUSH HIS TEETH.

Ron and Harry- cut that hair. the pictures in the book dont show "long hair" harry.

Dumbledore-enuff with those weird hats, look powerful and majical for pete's sake! your spose' to be ! I mean the actor doesnt look up to it when the 5th and 6th book come out!

Cho- JKR's cho is hot, movies-not

Snape-personally, i love the movie snape. the book snape, he doesnt even look close but JKR keeps up with her beliefs. Wanna compare? Theres a picture of snape in one of the ending chapters (at the begging of the chapter) look at it and shriek

everything else- same as qouted by darth payne

Yami no Riku

01-04-2006, 01:32 AM

Yeah. Especially "those." >_> <_< >_> <_< >_> <_<

I really didn't think they'd use someone like her for a Harry Potter movie....

Some 'tard posted nude pictures of her from another movie on a PG-13 movie forum I go to... Needless to say, he got IP banned and the pics got deleted. :rolleyes:

I wonder if WB has a hand in those sort of movies... It makes you wonder why and how they would go about choosing someone like that...

Sephiroth5567

02-02-2006, 06:32 AM

Voldemort: Yeah. I can see what you guys are talking about. He sucked. Seriously. The world's most evil character doesn't act that retarded. Sorry.

It's his first real appearance. Give him time. He'll improve. Probably by the big fight at the end of the 5th, he'll be better.

Anybody catch that foreshadowing about the department of Mysteries in the movie. When Moody was talking.

flame_champion

02-02-2006, 12:25 PM

Voldemort: Yeah. I can see what you guys are talking about. He sucked. Seriously. The world's most evil character doesn't act that retarded. Sorry.

surely you aren't questioning the acting skills of ralph fiennes...
that would be madness. he has earned more nominations for and received awards than the rest of the harry potter cast combined.

ralph fiennes's acting is superb. he does an excellent job of conveying emotion. it's hardly "acting retarded" as you put it. for shame...

orange peel

02-03-2006, 07:07 PM

surely you aren't questioning the acting skills of ralph fiennes...
that would be madness. he has earned more nominations for and received awards than the rest of the harry potter cast combined.

ralph fiennes's acting is superb. he does an excellent job of conveying emotion. it's hardly "acting retarded" as you put it. for shame...

by acting skills, u mean screeching, hissing, pointing, waving the wand, and acting evil... i believe i can do better...i mean it:p :p

Darth Payne

02-03-2006, 07:11 PM

He acted like a villain would on an 5 year old's saturday morning TV show. There's a difference between that and a real villain.

orange peel

02-03-2006, 07:17 PM

He acted like a villain would on an 5 year old's saturday morning TV show. There's a difference between that and a real villain.

But the villains in Kids WB are awesome! .......but i get wat you mean