I've seen every one of these movies, either on release day or shortly after, with my daughter. We've been crying to each other across the miles about not being able to make our annual pilgrimage together to the theatre for this.
I'm holding out for now - so is she. There's a chance she might be home next month.
There was an interesting interview about which of the three child stars is going to last the longest in the industry. Rupert Grinch said that Daniel Radcliffe had the most ambition, Emma Watson plans to go to college instead, leaving him as the "laid back" one of the three. But movie critics say that he's probably the most likely of the three to still be acting when he's in his 80s.
He also said that he thinks of Emma Watson as a sister, which make some of the scenes in this movie and the last one rather awkward.
I'm a total Harry Potter Fan. Yes, I've waiting for hours at midnight to get the books and then stayed up all night reading them.
I haven't had a chance to watch this one but hope to once I get back from my trip to Iowa this weekend.
The movies have been a bit of a disappointment for me. Since reading the books first I tend to have trouble not picking the movie apart. I have to admit, had I not read to books I would have very much enjoyed the movie as my husband and best friends have.
I'm not a huge fan of the books, because I have taste. They're very unchallenging, though, which makes them OK to read when I'm feeling very lazy. The same can be said of all previous films. I'll probably catch this one at some point, but I'm in no rush to see it.
I read the first 3 books a while ago and I remembered liking them a lot. I've also liked every movie except for the fifth one.
I really want to read the books, but I'm so incredibly lazy that I'm glad the movies were made. Maybe one day I'll get off, on?, my *** and read the books so that I know what really went down. :p
The fragrant and toothsome Emma Watson gave an enchanting interview to Jonathan Ross where she redifined the word "coquettish" - when asked about kissing Ron, she said "It felt like incest".
The fragrant and toothsome Emma Watson gave an enchanting interview to Jonathan Ross where she redifined the word "coquettish" - when asked about kissing Ron, she said "It felt like incest".
He's ok. Ginny has gotten taller than him, which makes me giggle. And I think Ron is adorable.
This is a good thing; it makes me feel less of a perv. Ginny is teh hawtness.
I haven't seen any Harry Potters in theater and I'd like to but we can't manage it right now. My wife wants to download a screencap so she can watch it RIGHT NOW but I'd rather hold out for some sort of legitimate release.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
I'd say literary accuracy was right around 46%, the movie seemed like the writers were reading cliffs notes instead of reading the actual book and using online blogs to determine which scenes would be represented. In other words the movie was a massive deluge of hog wash.
Scene 1: 3 dark wizards destroy the bridge.
This was never in the book, it is mentioned that several cars were thrown in the river when the bridge broke in half. The bridge scene is of a Walking bridge... no cars.
This makes sense because the alternative is 20 mins of flashbacks in a discussion scene with Cornelius Fudge introducing the new Minister of magic to the Prime minister of England.
Scene 2: The train station, the cafe, and the black girl?
Not in the book, Harry was removed from the Dursley's house as usual and taken to the "Burrow" after visiting the new potions teacher.
A completely asinine change that was not needed. The girl in question is likely someone who was added in exchange for sexual favors Either for Ratcliffe or one of the directors. Also could have been Ratcliffe's real girlfriend or some rubbish.
This was all in the first 5 minutes of the movie. Anyone who has read the book could sit in the theater and literally lose his/her voice just saying "Wrong" every time there was a mistake. I know quite a few people who did this including the girl sitting right behind me in the theater who I wished would shut up, the good thing is she gradually got quieter. The entire movie came off as rushed with very little of the plot being shown, although a great deal of time went into the romantic lives of the kids there was little of the true puzzle for the entire book, "Who is the Half blood prince?"
Basically Hermione looked it up in the library and couldn't find anything, Later Snape blurts out "I'm the Half Blood Prince." Decisive battles do not occur, the deatheaters literally danced out the doors in direct conflict with what was written as a massive bloody wizard war with deaths and werewolf maulings. Speaking of which where is Bill Weasley whose werewolf bite, and later Marriage to Lefluer is a cornerstone to the final book.
Finally the ending, maybe just maybe they got this right... don't hold your breath, Dumbledore's heart melting funeral gone in favor of a worthless scene of a sunset featuring Ron, Hermione, and Harry talking. Basically if you've read the book and easily lose your temper save your $7 stay home and read the book again you'll live a happier life for it.
My rating: 2 stars out of 7 this movie does not have legs and relies entirely on it's literary namesake. It will be in second run theaters within 5 weeks, and on DVD within 3 months unless they try to shoot for Christmas release. Look for this dvd on the $13 rack at Walmart next spring. As a fan of the books I was thoroughly disappointed and will not go back, I've seen Startrek three times and would go back to see it 2 more times and it destroyed the entire mythos that inspired it.
Interviews with the actors reveal there will be a great deal of battles in the remaining 2 movies however with 60% of the defining events from previous books left on the cutting room floor how much of the bloody book will be left for the final movie.
Don't get me wrong I love complaining, I do it well, this movie gave me a great deal of material however it is my sincerest hope that JK Rowling will have a firm hand on the script of the final movie before these moronic script writers reduce her literary work to a pile of sh*t and cost her millions of literary perfectionist fans.
Just saw it today with Elne Clare and my mom. Left out a lot, but moved quick enough. Yeah scenes at the beginning are not canonical, but overall it did seem that the kids were having fun and the plot is moved forward.
After I night's sleep. Basically the movie exists to set up the last two flicks. Still some nice scenes, I wasn't tempted to sleep or get up to use the bathroom.
Let me qualify my following statements before I get into this:
- I have not read, nor intend to read, the Harry Potter books. - I have not watched, nor intend to watch, the Harry Potter movies. - I'm only commenting on the Book to Movie transition
To be honest, any movie, when taken from the book, will most likely fail to live up to anyone's expectation. Lord of the Rings left tons of great background story out in favor of long, sweeping pans. I Am Legend *********** the soul out of the original source material, turning an amazingly well-done short story and turning it into a completely horrid film.
So, those expecting to sit through 2 hours of a movie and come away with the same experience as reading the story will be horribly disappointed every single time. What you need to look at is, does the movie at least contain the same emotional arc as the original source material? If it does, then it's a successful translation of the material to the screen.
And judging from the fact that they apparently gutted an emotional scene from the book, and instead used a stereotypical sunset scene, I'd have to say they dun ****** up.
After I night's sleep. Basically the movie exists to set up the last two flicks.
The last movie you mean; this was the 6th installment.
I saw it today, and didn't care for it. It felt unfulfilling, and left out some of the best scenes, like the fight in the tower and the funeral at the end (which was the real tear-jerker, not Dumbledore's death itself). The acting was pretty good, the scenes were shot well and looked great, throwing out the canon was annoying but understandable... but it was still just a very boring movie in a lot of parts. Only really good action was Dumbledore frying Inferi. The Draco-Harry duel was a yawn-fest, as said there was no attack on the tower, and the newly added scene when the Burrow is attacked reminded me of "Signs" with all the running through farmland (or marsh I guess in this case) and ended up having no action either.
I give it a 6/10, for looking good but failing to deliver anything interesting.
The last book is being made into a two-parter, filmed in one production, released over two years. Like Kill Bill.
I'm trying to figure out how they'll split it. The first part being the wedding, then Harry, Hermione and Ron on the run, then the second part with their imprisonment, Malfoy Manor then the battle at Hogwarts? But they'll probably butcher most of the good parts out if them as well.
Edited, Jul 18th 2009 6:57pm by Debalic
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.