harry potter, i just like it better, narnia was good 2 tho
__________________ THE VINES<THE LIVING END< THE SUBWAYS< THE WHITE STRIPES< YOUTH GROUP< NIRVANA<
Mad World is a very good song.
natalie aka ferret
la li li natalie
Actually, Narnia was probably pointed toward the mickey mouse club even more. after all, it is a Disney movie.
But I'm not ignorant to other books, and I don't think most Harry Potter fans are. Because I've read plenty of other books besides Harry Potter, like LOTR and Eragon (Not sure if you guys heard of it, but it's a really interesting book.) but I tried reading Narnia a few times, when I found it lying around, and it never caught my interest.
i love the narnia series i have loved them ever since i was little, i just didn't like the movie it was like they tried ripping off lord of the rings but didn't quite pull it off it just didn't suit the style it needed another director
As for harry potter 4 it was a big book and they had to cut alot of it to make it work
Reading other books like LotR and Eragon (yes i have read it; very good) doesn't really justify not being ignorant however. I suggest to anyone wanting to broaden there horizons more than just HP to make a leap into other genres.
It's a shame that most will likely vote for Harry potter, not on the basis that it is better but because there just HP mad.
Hold on, Narnia isn't "another genre" it's pretty much the same genre as those other books, including Harry Potter. And I read other genres, too. I don't just read fantasy.
Gender: Female Location: The Dream World...somewhere
Okay, this is an easy one...GoF is a much more entertaining movie than Narnia because the movie's flow and pace are moving in constant speed. Narnia was way slow in the begining and even though I think it is a good movie and the books are really great too. The movie adaptation of Narnia falls short to the book. The Narnia movie runs at an incredibly slow pace at first culminating in a final battle that feels like it lasts a lousy five minutes or less.
And while HP and the GoF movie is good there is a lot of material that was left out of the movie. Whereas in Narnia there wasn't much material in it to justify such a long movie, to me much of it was a waste of good film. I don't know what you think...but since the two movies ARE placed in the same category I would have to say HP is the better film. Even with all it's slips and other bad stuff(like Dan Radcliffe's performance in Cedric's death which was really bad) it is still the superior film.
I agree with it... I really liked Narnia, but I had the feeling the story didn't really was finished, there was missing so much.. and I didn't even read the book yet, (Im gonna do that now... :P) I think Narnia could have been so much better.. and with Harry Potter, there isn't anything missing.. I know there are things missing, but the story in the movie doesn't suffer from it...
it depends on which are you talking about the books or the movies
i like the harry potter books and in fact i love them, but the chronices of narna book was childish and terribley written
but i like the chronicles of narnia movie more than i like the Gof
because i had more action than the gof, not that there wasn't any action scenes but there was more and it captured more suspense and what can i say i'm a drama person
and maybe i liked it more because in the gof movie had lot of stuff was cutt out, and i was really disappiontted in it, they could of done better and as much as i want to say i like it i can't lie to you guys
Best Movie-Chronicles of Narnia the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe (And the title is grammically incorrect is suppose to be Lion, Witch and the Wardrobe
Best Book-Harry Potter Goblet of Fire
Last edited by biggesthpfan on Feb 18th, 2006 at 09:39 PM
The Goblet of Fire sucked cock! They showed Harry finding Crouch in the forest, he runs up to DD and... its never mentioned again! Damn idiots...
Narnia is technically more of a classi etc and a better book but I prefer Potter
__________________
Thanks to Badwolf for the great sig!
I never understood why people would want a movie to be EXACTLY like a book. It wouldn't be fun if it was exactly like their counterparts. I'm tired of people saying that they destroyed the book, because that's not true. some things just wouldn't work in a movie, and as long as they hide it well, it's all right! And Harry Potter did that. If I never read the book, I'd understand it. because everyone I asked that saw it understood it and didn't even ask about it. When I told them that some moments were missing, they just said, "really?" because it was so well covered up. When I went to see Narnia, I was just confused at certain parts, because I never read the books.
More action in Narnia? No offense, but Harry Potter and Narnia both have the same amount of action. the only difference with the action is that in Harry Potter, they weren't afraid of showing blood and gore. In narnia, they didn't even show a little blood in the big battle scene. I mean, I know it's a kids movie, but so was the first Harry Potter, and even that one showed a little blood! and what was MORE suspenseful about it than Harry Potter? I wasn't freaking out at any of the scenes in Narnia. the only real suspense was the crucifixion scene with Aslan.
Why would you need to mention any more about that? people already got the picture that crouch was dead, and they learned the reason why with the pensieve. Not to mention if you looked at the scene before the death, you'll see Mad Eye doing that tongue thing. and when you see Barty Crouch Jr. do it in the pensieve, then you can make the connection that Moody had something to do with it.
__________________
Buds-MerMorgan02; AddictedToBoys
Last edited by #1Rupert_Lover on Feb 19th, 2006 at 02:09 PM
KMC Community Forums
Jan 10th, 2006 09:42 PM
i'm sure everyone will vote for potter.... )
