hmmph, y did they have to make harry potter movies @ all?

😒 Does anyone else agree with me that the harry potter movies suck? Admit it, the casting (maybe except for Daniel Radcliffe) was bad (who had ever heard of Rupert Grind and Emma Watson before HP?), they skipped a lot of good parts, which were only shown on DVD. 😠
Actually I think the movies were disappointments! They just put in a lot of special effects and hoped that would make people happy 😠 !

yeah i no! the films are a load of crap compared to the books!

The movies are an insult to the books!!!

i disagree and i think they did a good job and until u become a director and have to deal with problems they have in movies and when ur a millionare then u have the right to critize the way the movies made. sry no offence but i dont think we have the right to critize and they must be good they made a !@#$ load of money

They left out all the best bits. They should have made it a bit longer. I wouldnt mind.

just make the 4th and 5th movie more than 2 1/2 hourd and ill be fine

look i can agree they left out sum bits worth while but they did a sensational job on the movies and in that type of industry things cost money and not everyone has an endlles pocket of money so when u see a bad movie dont think oh crap think poor b@st@rds lol hahahahha

meh well i just think that it's a load of crap, and the acting isn't that great 😛

I only like prof Lupin but other than that I hate Harry Potter and think its rubbish!!!!

The movies could of beeen way better but I still enjoyed them 😄

all movies where good ... its the fact they missed half of the plot from the third one ...

Yeah...that sucked 🙁......I wish they mad extended editions like with LOTR.. That would b cool 😄

there were really few important points that they missed in PoA, and it was the best directed movie of the bunch; it had a darker, more real tone than the first two, which were obviously made for children. Cuaron's movie was good for both children and adults both

Yup 😄

i thought that the movies were awesome.....and if all u want to do n here is critize the movies and things then y r u here??

Im not critising

i thought casting was pretty good and based on the available money, they did a pretty good job, except i didn't like dan, i think his acting is entirely superficial and emma puts too much of herself into the character unfortunately her characteristics she chooses to portray thru hermione are not adequate for the character, however rupert did a great job, completely natural, you actually saw ron thru him instead of just watching emma and dan thru hermione and harry, also i hated that they gave hermione all the important lines and reduced ron to the comidic relief

I liked the movies .... but I like more the books

Originally posted by zelda_girl
😒 Does anyone else agree with me that the harry potter movies suck? Admit it, the casting (maybe except for Daniel Radcliffe) was bad (who had ever heard of Rupert Grind and Emma Watson before HP?), they skipped a lot of good parts, which were only shown on DVD. 😠
Actually I think the movies were disappointments! They just put in a lot of special effects and hoped that would make people happy 😠 !

They made HP movies because HP books were popular you idiot. And who gives a flying crap if the actors weren't heard of before, THE CAST WAS CHOSEN TO CLOSELY RESEMBLE HOW THE CHARACTERS WERE DESCRIBED! And they didn't do a bad job acting either. I assume you're not a director, so you have no idea the problems that come with the job. The movies were good. Get over it. (zips mouth)

do you think if you werent a HP book fan and you didnt read all the books that the movies you critisize would have been looked at in another way instead of being looked at as boring and suckful? 😬 just asking.....