Saw it: HP GoF - what did you think?

Okay - I dumped my kids at Kidspark today (a babysitting drop off service), picked up lunch, packed it in my diaper bag and went off to see Harry Potter Goblet of Fire.

It was good -- but not as good as I'd hoped.

It's a HUGE book, and I knew it would be hard to cram all of the action in - but I was disappointed in the parts that were cut out.

I'll wait to see others general feedback before we start dissecting specifics - I don't want to post spoilers on Day 1.

What did you think??

[SueC]

Re: Saw it: HP GoF - what did you think?

Okay - I dumped my kids at Kidspark today

What is this magical place that you speak of???

[houseelf]

JEALOUS!

DH was post call and picked up DS to take him to it while I stayed home with the baby. On one hand, I was thrilled, the guys really needed to spend some time together and the both looooovee fantasy/sci fi.

On the other hand, I was like, ummm... I spent a year of my life reading this series to our son, shouldn't I be the one to take him? But that is just the little troll in me that I have to beat down.

Anyway, I hope to see it one night this week after the kiddies go to bed.

...Return back to HP GOF discussion...

Kelly

[Tenacious_D]

I was really anticipating the release of this movie (after having read everything up to this point) and I was also a little disappointed with the end product. The visual effects were amazing but there was so much left out that I thought was great in the book...oh well
Overall, I was still entertained but b/c I read the books, I kept looking for certain scenes to take place and they never did. In order to show everything in the book, they would have to make it into a miniseries (that would last a few months)!

[Sheherezade]

Not a fan of the new movie.....but don't get me started. I'm a freak.

Angie - PLEASE get started. I've been waiting for your opinion since you had so many viewings scheduled!!

[Sheherezade]

Well.....the good news is that the parts of the story they decided to cut this time were not essential plot elements. That's what ticked me off last time. The Rita Skeeter storyline, the Winky/SPEW story and the complexities of the Barty Crouch story are gone. I think the scriptwriter made good choices there, but I think the dialogue was poor. I despised how they put the great "The time is coming soon for us all to choose between what is right, and what is easy." line into a funny little scene with HP packing at the end. Seems like they just shoved it in there. I think Dumbledore was directed all wrong - or the actor has a completely different view of Dumbledore than I do. What was with the screaming and shaking HP after his name floated out of the Goblet? I don't remember Dumbledore being livid or afraid then ... just curious and concerned.

Now, I am appreciating the subtle magical world that Alfonzo Cauron created in PoA - even though he dropped a lot of the book's details. This one - this Mike Newell picture - is filled with those cheesy Hollywood moments in summer movies. Some examples: gillyweed Harry doing a backflip out of the water before continuing on his second task in the Black Lake, the dragon flight ending in a battle perched on top of the Hogwarts castle (with several near death moments, of course), the severe overacting by Barty Crouch Jr. (the lip licking thing was out of control!!), the falling into the Pesieve with a big scream, the whirling carnival ride portkey bit......BLEH. Hollywood magic, not Harry magic. Basically, I don't think Mike Newell is a huge HP fan himself. I think he didn't "get" the whole HP mood.

Of course, I'll probably see it again - and buy the DVD.

I was not thrilled with it either, and I'm a bit less forgiving of the items that were cut by the screenwriter, too. I think the Barty Crouch thing was pretty important, and the meeting with "Fluffy" to fill in backstory would have been nice, too. Plus, I like the Winky / Dobby thing (I'm just a dork), and I think this flick could have used a light moment or two. I agree with Angie's assessment of the "hollywood" moments - v. annoying - the Hermionie / Harry on either side of the tent thing was ridiculous. I also don't remember Myrtle getting quite so suggestive in the tub, if you know what I mean.

As for Dumbledore -- WTH?? He is NEVER angry with Harry - even when he is angry with Harry! He's one of those "quietly angry" folks who just make you feel worse b/c they stay so calm. In the book he wasn't angry, he was worried. He knew Harry didn't have the ability to pass the age line.

This is the first movie I've seen AFTER reading the book (I saw the other movies first), so I guess that's why I'm so disappointed. The only thing I felt was done well was they graveyard / Voldemort scene -- but it's really graphic and scary and a lot of parents will keep their kids away from it - which is a bummer for the kids who are also excited about the film (not that it's the wrong call -- just a bummer for the kids).

Holy run-on sentence Batman!

[PrincessFiona]

We saw it this weekend too, and...I felt pretty letdown too. I haven't read the book yet and as a result, I found myself not understanding several of the scenes or how they came together. We took some other children with our own and they had to explain things to me after the movie.

I agree with the opinion that this was more hollywood magic than harry potter magic. I also felt that the 'contest' ended without me really understanding that it had ended and that there was a clear 'winner' and felt that the ending was very unresolved....I won't post why because I don't want to spoil anything for those that haven't seen it...but the movie just sort of ...ended...without tying together all of the loose ends. When it ended I just kind of said "huh?"

Still, like Angie...we'll probably see it again and buy the dvd. They need to get rid of this producer though and go back to the old guy.

[houseelf]

Finally saw it and while I agree with the above posts, I have to say that any HP brightens my day. I simply love, love, love, J.K. Rowling and H.P., even when it isn't as good as it could be.

Add to the fact that they choose Raife Fiennes to play Voldemort.....whew....even monster garb and makeup can't hide his royal hotness.

I completely agree that this was like reading a sparse Clif notes version which neglected some of the best parts. HP must be absorbed, not gobbled up. This movie tried to accomplish way too much leaving it feel like a jumbled roller coaster ride. It was Hollywood entertaining, however.

I completely agree that Dumbledore was all wrong. Even J.K. herself has stated that Dumbledore epitomizes all that is good. His ire and impatience were NOT accurate representations. Further, J.K.'s brillance partially resides in her mastery of weaving the details into the overall plot. This movie certainly neglected some key components. Besides, how could you leave out the beloved house elves which I so identify with?

Still, I will see this again and again. Any HP is better than none.

Kelly

[Vanquisher]

Wow! I thought I really liked the movie until I read all of your very valid points. I thought it was much better as a testament to the book than PoA.

I remember during the movie thinking, "why is Dumbledore shaking Harry?" Also, "I don't remember Myrtle getting go friendly."

However, I really loved the way most of the plot was really in there. I liked the portkey feeling, and I really felt like that was how it was described.

There were a few little things that were changed, but overall, I think it was a great movie and it would be really hard to get all the elements in there. After all, we all see it a little differently in our heads. It was over two and a half hours. Anything else and it would have required intermission. I actually took both my kids to see it and my 20 month old was so good!! My 7-year-old doesn't scare really at all.

Richard Harris was a better Dumbledore. It is so sad he wasn't able to finish.

[Auspicious]

We saw it. We liked it.

Basically I really liked the tone of the first two movies--to me they were very enchanting and cozy, and that made a good base from which all Harry's scary stuff could then take place. In comparison I found movie 3 to be pretty dreary in its lighting and sets--it's all craggy terrain and overcast skies. Much more an adult, fantasy-genre feel rather than the kids'-world feeling of the first two, and far too influenced by Lord of the Rings. Movie 4 still suffered a bit from that, I think, but at least it had lots of athletic good cheer to bolster it. I thought the Quidditch World Cup part was very well done (I thought the portkey was good), as were the tournament challenges.

I guess I just miss the way Hogwarts the school was depicted in the first two. It was easy to understand why Harry considered it his true home even though it was dangerous. The Hogwarts of 3 & 4 just doesn't say "true home" to me and I'm not quite as eager to visit it. I'd still rather have the movies than not have them, though.

And I totally agree about Dumbledore. I miss Richard Harris in that role.

there wasn't enough Snape.
Oh, wait, its not all about my lusting for Alan Rickman and his voice?

I dont' think they made enough of a big deal about the Death Eaters and the Dark Mark and just how terrifying that whole thing was for the adults. The scene in the graveyard was good, though.

I agree about Dumbledore.

[Rapunzel]

All I can say is:

HUGE sigh of relief that I'm not the only one with a Snape crush.

AND, I have a lot of gripes about the film but the one that I haven't seen mentioned is that I think Voldemort was not depicted as incredibly frightening as he should have been. I was wanting goose-pimples and I didn't get them. :|

[Sheherezade]

I have a close friend that loves the whole Potter thing and she came away from the film saying "Why did Ralf Fiennes play Voldemort gay?" I didn't see it the first time I went in, but I was giggling through the graveyard scene the third time I watched. All that prancing about and exaggerated hand gestures..... Who knew?